Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mothers of the Disappeared/archive1

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 not promoted by Laser brain 04:50, 14 March 2011 [1].

Mothers of the Disappeared[edit]

Nominator(s): Melicans (talk, contributions) 05:21, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Midnight, our sons and daughters / Were cut down, taken from us / Hear their heartbeats... / We hear their heartbeats..."

Hello everybody. Today I bring to you an article on the U2 song "Mothers of the Disappeared". The closing track of The Joshua Tree, it details the plights of an organization of women whose children were forcibly disappeared. I could go on, but heck; that's what the article is for! I've thoroughly exhausted all of my resources and I am confident that this meets all of the FA criteria. The article has been through a recent Peer Review, and I hope that it will be considered among the best of Wikipedia's work when the process is through. Enjoy the article! Melicans (talk, contributions) 05:21, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sources comments: Minor points only:-

Refs 16, 31, 39 (McCormick): At first glance "McCormick" does not appear in the bibliography. It appears as "U2 (2006). McCormick, Neil. ed." I would drop the initial "U2" and place McCormick in its proper alphabetical sequence.
~~Ref 17: fix hyphen in pages range~~
Ref 62: Is Propaganda the name of a journal or magazine? Who publishes it? Is "'Click.' Inside PopMart. 'Click.'" the title of an article?
~~Ref 47 should be placed at the end of the sentence that it is citing.~~

Ref 65: "Raidió Teilifís Éireann" should not be italicised (it isn't a printed source). Check for other instances.

In the bibliography: No apparent citations to "U2 – The Joshua Tree: Authentic Record Transcriptions"

~~Bibliography: Publisher locations missing from Cogan, Kootnikoff~~

A few sample spotchecks carried out without problems arising. Other than the above, sources and citations look fine. Brianboulton (talk) 18:48, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some initial responses:

The McCormick references follow the standard our WikiProject has agreed upon. The book doesn't have a copyright page that clearly outlines author roles in the book and different sources will tell you different things (e.g. WorldCat, Amazon, etc). The band members are listed on the cover, but most sources credit the book to McCormick, and to U2 as a group. However, all of the words in the book are the band members' own - McCormick doesn't offer his own words and only compiled the band members' accounts of their history, so he essentially is an editor (and the "cite book" template is correct in its formatting for editors). Rather than credit the footnotes to U2, which could be confusing since they have authored and published many items that can be used as references, we credit McCormick as the editor.

I accept what you say. On the other hand, for clarity's sake it would be possible to format the short citations: "U2 (2006). McCormick, Neil (ed), p. xxx" (This is a suggestion not a request)

Ref 17 had the hyphen fixed
Ref 47 is only supporting the dedication part of the sentence - the date and circumstances of his fate are supported by the 2 citations that close the paragraph.
Ref 62 is a fan magazine published for U2 fan club members, the publisher is unknown (at least by me, I never owned a paper copy of any of the issues).

Can someone clarify what (28/29) is referring to? Brianboulton (talk) 18:56, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(28/29) is the issue number. That particular publication was a double issue and labelled as both issue 28 and issue 29. Melicans (talk, contributions) 19:40, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 65 has had the radio station un-italicized.
Cogan and Kootnikoff now have locations.

Let us know if you find anything else. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 16:43, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think Y2kcrazyjoker4 addressed most of the concerns you presented. In regards to the others:

"'Click.' Inside PopMart. 'Click.'" is the title of an article.
If need be, I can place reference 47 at the end of the paragraph along with the two others. I placed it in the middle of the sentence because that was the only part it supported.
The Authentic Record Transcriptions initially went to "Authentic Record Transcriptions (1999)" in the footnotes. Both have now been amended with an author. Melicans (talk, contributions) 20:15, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm satisfied with the sources, subject to the small requested clarification on Propaganda. Brianboulton (talk) 18:56, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Images/Media

File:U2_Mothers_of_the_Disappeared.ogg needs further copyright information - producer, copyright holder? Does U2 hold copyright, or does Island?
File:President_Ronald_Reagan_receives_the_Tower_Commission_Report_with_John_Tower_and_Edmund_Muskie.jpg - need ARC identifier. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:36, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The sound sample has been amended with the producers and copyright holder of the song. U2 own all of the rights to their music, and have done since 1983 I believe. I'm looking for the ARC identifier for the Reagan image, and will get back to you once I have found one. Melicans (talk, contributions) 20:15, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: I found and added the ARC identifier to the Reagan image in Commons. Melicans (talk, contributions) 20:31, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good, thanks. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:03, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Hating the quotebox overuse on this otherwise well-presented article. I normally like seeing a couple of these in an article, but the problem here is that they give undue weight to the always-melodramatic U2's Save the World rhetoric. As a U2 hater, my reading might be biased, but I think the article thus suffers from a severe pro-U2 bias.—indopug (talk) 16:50, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've integrated two of the five quote boxes into the prose. I don't see how the remaining three could give a pro-U2 bias; one describes the process of mixing the song, and the other two the inspiration behind it. Melicans (talk, contributions) 20:02, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.