Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Diorama (Silverchair album)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted 22:29, 14 May 2008.

Diorama (album)[edit]

A highly popular album by Silverchair. Well written, uses reliable sources, etc. (well, that's my opinion!)—I think this article is FA ready. As well as a GAN reviewer, there is quite a bit of peer reviewing in the talk page archives. I'm happy to act on any new suggestions. Cheers, dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 00:54, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I think "nothing that" should be "noting that" unless I'm mistaken? naerii - talk 01:08, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Comments ...And my Aussie music education continues, courtesy of Dihydrogen Monoxide. Close to ready; however, some things to consider:
    • I seems odd to write "ARIA" twice (in the context of awards) before finally explaining the acronym in a sentence. Can we fix that?
    • "Johns initially wrote eight songs, only to later erase all record of them later..." Can we make this more specific? If the album is digitally recorded, he just deleted the files? If analog recorded, does this mean he destroyed the masters?
    • The Metacritic stuff.. who are Ink 19 and Dot music? If those are amateur reviewers logged into a web site, especially anonymously, I don't think we want to include that as a reliable source. I'm not familiar with that site.
      • Since they're on Metacritic they aren't amateur, but since they don't add much (couldn't find full reviews) I've removed them anyways. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 04:35, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • You said a couple times that Johns wrote most of the album, but I don't recall reading about anyone else being involved in the songwriting process. Parks did some arrangements, but did anyone do any songwriting? --Laser brain (talk) 04:26, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Efe - Efe (talk) 03:05, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Hello DM. Here's my comment on this article:

  • the album saw Silverchair lead singer Daniel Johns co-produce for the first time, alongside David Bottrill. I usually read this kind of phrasing and its sounds awkward. --Efe (talk) 06:11, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hmm...maybe it's just me, but I'm not seeing the issue (removing saw would make it worse, IMO). dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 09:30, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Its not actually an issue and maybe its just me who felt its awkward. Anyway, would be better if reworded. --Efe (talk) 09:34, 9 May 2008 (UTC)\[reply]
        • Do you have any suggestions? I really can't see how to make it flow better... dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 09:39, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • Like, "...the album was co-produced by Silverchair....for the first time, alongside..." Something like that. Im not into fixing because me too have troubles with grammars and brilliant prose, but as a reviewer, i felt its ackward. Anyway, its just my opinion. BTW, that "..., alongside David...", its like David also produced a Silverchair album for the first time, or he is? Its ambiguous. --Efe (talk) 10:05, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Johns wrote most of the album, utilising a piano, I think its beter to put that "utising a piano" first then comma to avoid many commas in a single sentence. --Efe (talk) 06:11, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Diorama charted successfully and was moderately well received by critics. Thats vague. Please be specific.
  • And there's a lot of minor stuffs in that para, like percent in this and stars in that. How important are they? You can probably summarized that as one, regarding to the preceding comment. --Efe (talk) 06:11, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I suppose I don't need to include the AMG/RS scores, they're mostly there for variety. Removed. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 09:30, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • It was eventually certified triple-platinum by ARIA. Diorama won five ARIA Awards in 2002. Stubby sentences. --Efe (talk) 06:11, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Silverchair performed "The Greatest View" at the ceremony; the song was subsequently nominated for "Highest Selling Album" in 2003. What is the significance of that performance why its in the lead? And, was "The Greatest View" nominated for "Highest Selling Album" of "Highest Selling Single"? --Efe (talk) 06:11, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Daniel Johns' home Do you need to state that in the infobox? Very specific. --Efe (talk) 06:11, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • April-October, 2001 This should not be linked. --Efe (talk) 06:11, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delink 2002 under "After All These Years" in the infobox. --Efe (talk) 06:11, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 2. Is the date the publication date of the access date? If its the former, confine it with parethesis; if the latter, change the format for consistency. --Efe (talk) 06:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Same through with ref 3, 7 and 8. And, do not link that incomplete date in ref 3. --Efe (talk) 06:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please go over with the format for consistency issues. Thank you. --Efe (talk) 06:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment

For this to reach FA, all quoted material must have direct citations. For instance, He worked with others in developing the album; Van Dyke Parks (Beach Boys, U2) collaborated on orchestral arrangements, and the pair spent much of their recording time attempting to describe the music in metaphorical terms, with Johns describing Parks' orchestral swells as "tidal waves" and violins as "a flock of birds". do not have one. I believe this is covered by the following citation but it must be cited. --Efe (talk) 01:43, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done (your guess was correct). dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 09:58, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

I did a ce; mainly converting the #1 to number one, and so forth, because it vastly improves readability and improves the way the text "looks". Do we need to have colour-coded infoboxes? Its rather ugly, and I really don't see the point of it. What they won and what didn't win is clear enough without the colours, but the red and green rather jumps at you when you're just scrolling down. indopug (talk) 06:41, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm...I copied that formatting from Silverchair discography, and I've used similar formatting on all my other album articles. I don't feel strongly about it (I rarely do), but I'd rather keep it—do you have a significant objection? dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 09:30, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hate that glaring colors as well. Maybe you can use light gray? Don't worry, though, its just my opinion. --Efe (talk) 09:36, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose for now based on what seems to be extensive copyediting required. No issue with the comprehensiveness but the text needs much work. I'm aware that some of the text I'm commenting on below has been changed in the last few hours. - Peripitus (Talk) 11:08, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved objections from Peripitus - Peripitus (Talk) 21:58, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • References
  • The fact that one of the labels was "Eleven" is not referenced anywhere and only listed in the lead and the infobox - should be in the body.
It's now mentioned in the Album and single releases section. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 01:03, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • General bits
  • Where mentioning a third-party organisation or reviewer it would make the article far clearer if, the first time used, a couple of extra words were added to make the source unambiguous. Eg: "three star critique from Rolling Stone" - from the printed magazine, website or a named reviewer ? Metacritic, All Music Guide, Triple J etc - a reader of the article would be hard pressed to know what these where unless they already knew. Often it's expanded on later in the article where it should be higher up.
OK, I've looked through and tried to fix all cases of these, please tell me if I've missed any. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 01:03, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wording - mostly in order from the top
  • "Released on 31 March 2002 by Eleven, the album saw Silverchair lead singer Daniel Johns co-produce for the first time, alongside David Bottrill". Does not mention what "Eleven" is, "Silverchair" is redundant and an album seeing a band is stretching language a trifle far. Perhaps "It was released by Australian record label 'Eleven: A Music Company' on 31 March 2002. Lead singer Daniel Johns had co-produced for the first time, alongside David Bottrill" - though I'm unhappy with my version too.
I had reworded this after Efe's comments ("Released on 31 March 2002 by Eleven, the album was co-produced by Daniel Johns and David Bottrill, both doing so for the first time on a Silverchair album.")—is this OK? dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 01:03, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Johns wrote most of the album, utilising a piano" - "Utili[s

*Oppose per 1a. This is FAC, and not FLC. The "Response" section has all these tables listing various things, and such information can be written out. These sections prohibit the article from being "engaging". LuciferMorgan (talk) 11:27, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    • The tabular data is, for the most part, already described in prose. Do you think the tables might be useful to readers who want a quick reference? Say someone came to the article to find out how the album charted. The tables might be more useful to them than having to read through the prose to find it. Just something to chew on. --Laser brain (talk) 14:14, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I've removed the (clearly unpopular) awards tables. The Charts table is a stalemate on album articles, so I've kept that. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 01:03, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as GA reviewer. Another great one from DHMO. Burningclean [speak] 22:04, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Being a GA reviewer is not a good basis to cast your support. And besides, there is a great disparity between a GA and an FA. =) --Efe (talk) 04:08, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • Current ref 24 is lacking a publisher. David Frickie "Silverchair See Past Tomorrow"
All fixed. Ealdgyth - Talk 04:15, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Being on the road, I didnt check external links. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:11, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • I gave this a review before, but I have some new thoughts:
    • Can we get a reference for the "210,000 copies" statistic (doesn't have to be in the lead, though).
      • Platinum = >70,000, thus triple platinum = >210,000. I've added that somewhere in the article. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 01:30, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Johns commented on the difference between what resonated well on piano compared to on guitar" sounds awkward to me. Can't think of a way to reword it atm though.
    • Attempted reword. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 01:30, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • "...he had written songs with the intention of Imbruglia singing them" Maybe "...he had written songs with the intention that Imbruglia would sing them"? Or "...he had written songs with intending for Imbruglia to sing them"? Neither one is great, but the wording just sounded a little weird there.
      • "Johns also denied rumours that he had written songs intending Imbruglia to sing them." OK? dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 01:30, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I still think the last sentence of that paragraph about the article's title seems a little tacked on there, with the rest of the paragraph being about the inspiration for songs. I don't suppose you could get away with putting it in the lead? It's kind of an introductory point, what the name's about.
      • Yeah, that sentence will probably seem the least out of place in the lead... done. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 01:30, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • "...the band '[reverted] back to their grunge sound'." So 'reverted' is part of this article, not the original quote? Why not just "...the band reverted 'back to their grunge sound'"?
  • Just suggestions, if I'm off base on any of them feel free to ignore. Similarly I've made some tweaks to the article which can be reverted if they weren't helpful. delldot talk 18:13, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • Contractions: wasn't, weren't, maybe others.
  • First paragraph is rather short; could it be expanded or merged?
  • "Lead singer Johns wrote most of the album at a piano, while the band took a 12-month break" -> shouldn't be acomma. (this comment is in direct violation of Giano's essay! :O)
  • "Silverchair worked with composer Van Dyke Parks on Diorama, which contains numerous orchestral arrangements and power ballads, as opposed to the post-grunge music typical of their earlier work." - very awkward phrasing, maybe "Silverchair worked with composer Van Dyke Parks on Diorama; the album contains numerous orchestral arrangements and power ballads, as opposed to the post-grunge music typical of their earlier work."
  • 'Five singles were released; "The Greatest View", "Without You", "Luv Your Life", and "Across The Night" appeared on the ARIA Singles Chart, and "After All These Years" was released as a promotional single.' - grammatically incorrect, should probably be two sentences: 'Five singles were released; "The Greatest View," "Without You," "Luv Your Life," "Across The Night," and "After All These Years". "Across The Night" appeared on the ARIA Singles Chart, and "After All These Years" was released as a promotional single.'
  • There's a lot of '"stuff",'. This should be "stuff,". (comma before quote)
    • The comma only goes inside the quotation marks if it's part of the quote, I believe? dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 01:30, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can't find much else at the moment, the majority of the article looks good. Nousernamesleftcopper, not wood 23:36, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    • Support - For the last one, I always learned it as the comma always goes in the quotes... oh well, maybe I remembered incorrectly or there's an odd difference in grammar standards from country to country. Everything else has been addressed nicely, so... Nousernamesleftcopper, not wood 01:51, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - I've agreed to do a quick copy edit for this article, and will place comments and questions here.

  • Does reference #8 confirm that he suffered from reactive arthritis? I see it is linked to him having therapy. (Integrated into article) Risker (talk) 01:59, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Quotes from source: "Silverchair frontman Daniel Johns thought his debilitating reactive arthritis would end his career." and "I've been doing physio and treatments constantly every day from 11am until 5pm. I do physiotherapy, then I get these really painful massages which break the hardened fluid in your legs, arms and back" (quoting Johns). dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 02:13, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should the US charts (Billboard, Hot Tracks) be identified as American? The charts for other countries are specifically identified, and since this is primarily an Australian band, it might be useful. (Integrated into article) Risker (talk) 04:03, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • From the Album and single releases section: "The band's tour in support of Diorama would take its name from "Across the Night", which took Johns nine hours to write on a sleepless night"...was that the intended tour, or did they actually tour? (integrated into article) Risker (talk) 04:20, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as copy editor. Risker (talk) 04:43, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Quick question. Been copyediting (see history) today, and came across this sentence: Johns wrote much of the album at a baby grand piano; he had taught himself the instrument and began composing with it during the band's post-Neon Ballroom break. This leads me to believe that Johns did not start learning to play piano until after Neon Ballroom. Is that true, or does this need to be reworded? If it needs to be reworded, I propose a very simple addition:
  • Johns wrote much of the album at a baby grand piano; he had previously taught himself the instrument and began composing with it during the band's post-Neon Ballroom break (bold for emphasis). I would normally just make a change like that, but if he really didn't learn piano until post-NeonBallroom, then it should stay as is. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 18:51, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • No, you're correct; as far as I can gather from the sources, he taught himself the piano during the post-Neon Ballroom break; he couldn't/didn't play it before then. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 09:58, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just gave a quick peek at their official site's tour archive[2], and it seems they played Lollapalooza in August 2007. Risker (talk) 19:52, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Nice work Risker. Did you look at my first question, by chance? Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:31, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I believe I have addressed both questions - took the Lollapalooza out (the reference article was from 2007 too), and have clarified the piano bit to state this was the first album where he used the piano for composition, which concurs with the reference source. Risker (talk) 21:35, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks Risker! I see the change to both of my "concerns" I'm content with the Lollapalooza fix, but still, the "piano" fix seems iffy. It still sounds like Johns didn'tstart playing piano until after his third album. (Neon Ballroom). I'll change it in a sec, tell me what you think! Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 22:11, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Update: Added "previously" to the sentence I had problems with. Cheers, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 22:17, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Works for me. I suppose though it might be an idea to ask DHMO... ;-) Risker (talk) 22:22, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Again, possible misinterpretation of the given source (just looked over it and I swear there was a link to Neon Ballroom given somewhere once...), but the current version is fine. Thanks for your help, Keeper and Risker! :) dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 09:58, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support now after the with only a couple of comments - Peripitus (Talk) 13:20, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • In the lead the sentence "While Bottrill had worked on albums for a wide variety of other bands, Diorama marked the first time lead singer Johns undertook production duties" has two issues. a wide variety is not more descriptive than just variety. Secondly the end reads poorly. I haven't fixed this as I don't like my version as well.
"Though Bottrill had worked on albums for various other bands, Diorama marked the first production work by lead singer Johns."
  • Album and single releases section paragraph 1. When discussing the chart ratings the word "number" is used to what seems excess. I prefer "The album peaked at number seven in New Zealand, number thirteen in Austria, number forty in Switzerland, and number 116 in France"...but I don't know if this is grammatically acceptable.
  • I don't think that "Additional personnel" should be a section break - consider just a semicolon at the start of the line to bold it.
  • Item one (lead paragraph, last sentence) changed. Used your sentence, except changed "work" to "credit", more specific. And presumably, as a band member, he "worked" on the production. This, I presume, would be the first album that he received a sleeve "credit" for it though in an official capacity.
  • Removed the "numbers" for clarity and readability.
  • Made additional personnel a bolded line instead of SB. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 15:07, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No objections to these changes, thanks Keeper. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 01:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • This FAC has (had) two unsigned caps and several declarations at the end of sentences rather than beginning (see WP:FAC instructions). If nominators will keep their FACs more readable, by contacting editors when they aren't following instructions, it will save me time. Caps need sigs or I'll remove them; I need to know who capped the comments. And when declarations are buried at the end of sentences, I may miss them on subsequent read-throughs. I read every FAC every day, but I can't guarantee then that when I go back to tally at the end of a week or two, I will see these declarations buried at the end of sentences. Please, when reviewers haven't adhered to the FAC instructions, ping them for a revisit; have mercy on my eyesight and typing :-) Thanks, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:36, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I apologise for any eye or finger damage that has taken place because of this FAC. As I said on my talk page I'll try to keep a shorter loose on commentators in future. :) Cheers, dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 01:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think there are 7 supports, I think the only oppose is resolved, it doesn't appear that images have been reviewed. I'll see if this is clearer on my next pass through. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:40, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I count seven supports and two struck oppositions (one later supported), with no opposition concerns still outstanding. In terms of the images, the album cover has the standard album-cover-rationale, and the audio samples use User:Giggy/Audio which has been OK'd in prior FACs. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 01:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. My apologies, SG, I never actually came out and said support (as copyeditor), not sure if you were counting me or not. I'm an FA n00b, sorry I don't have the formatting down yet or if anything I've done to this point has been out of process/out of place. Cheers, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 20:50, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Diorama_(Silverchair_album)&oldid=1140114204"