Talk:Powderfinger

As of 23 August 2008, this article is a very good article. (compare to current). This means the community feels this article is written very well. You may see the vote that promoted the article here.

Requirements for good articles

1. The article must be about a subject which belongs in Wikipedia. There is no use improving articles that do not belong here, and better fit another wiki, like Wikibooks, Wikispecies, Wiktionary...

   Y it's an encyclopedia article so I assume it meets this criteria. —Giggy 10:14, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

2. The article must have a certain length. A minimum is 3.5 kilobytes, not including infoboxes, images, references, other websites, interwiki, and categories. There is no use in denoting very short articles as good.

   Y according to [1], there is 4.24 KB of readable prose. —Giggy 10:14, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

3. The article must have gone through a few revisions, possibly by different editors. No one writes perfect articles.

   Y well, it's gone through many revisions, though it's mostly been me. I'm sure others will spot and fix mistakes. —Giggy 10:14, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

4. The article must be filed in the appropriate category. It must have at least one interwiki link.

   Y Category:Rock bands and Category:Australia (that will need narrowing down at some stage). Six interwikis at time of writing. —Giggy 10:14, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

5. The last few revisions should be minor changes (like spell-checking or link-fixing).
6. All important terms should be linked and there must not be many red links left. Red links point to articles that do not exist yet. Usually the important word or phrase is only linked the first time it occurs.
7. If there are any illustrations, they must be pertinent to the article. They must also be properly labelled.

   Y two images. The second isn't a requirement but it's nice to have more than one. —Giggy 10:14, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

8. There must be no templates pointing to the fact that the article needs improvement. These templates include {{complex}}, {{cleanup}}, {{stub}}, {{unreferenced}} and {{wikify}}. The article also should not need them.

   Y —Giggy 10:14, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

9. Content that is from books, journal articles or other publications needs to be referenced. This can either be done with <ref>..</ref><references/> tags, or as a list of publications.

   Y —Giggy 10:14, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)

• Perhaps "(plays guitar)" rather than just "(guitar)" etc.
  • Done. —Giggy 04:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
• link "established "
  • Done. —Giggy 04:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
• deliberate -> on purpose (perhaps?)
  • Done. —Giggy 04:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
• (2000) - actually say it was out in 2000 otherwise could be confused with the title.
  • Done. —Giggy 04:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
• "was their most famous" was or still is?
  • Still is; clarified. —Giggy 04:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
• "Rolling Stone" + magazine.
  • Done. —Giggy 04:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
• appeared on movies - in movies?
  • Done. —Giggy 04:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
• "more intense music" simplify this.
  • Done. —Giggy 04:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
• Simplify "announced " too (I've been told to do this...!)
  • Done. —Giggy 04:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
• could link NZ.
  • Done. —Giggy 04:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
• any reason why Year and Chart in the tables are capitalised?
  • Done. —Giggy 04:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Otherwise, good. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:37, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks heaps! —Giggy 04:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Are/Is

Can someone clarify this for me. When writing about a band in the opening sentence do you say are or is? For example "Powderfinger are..." or "Powderfinger is...." Is there a rule? if there is I dont know about so can someone tell me please. My personal preference is 'are' by the way if you were wondering. The Flying Spaghetti Monster!

There's no rule; it depends if you're using British or American English. They differ. I use Australian (basically the same as British) English, hence "is". —Giggy 10:04, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

GA

This passed its GA nomination at Wikipedia:Proposed good articles/Archive 2#Powderfinger 2. —Giggy 10:04, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments to help perhaps get somewhere near PVGA

1. Consider articles for the band members.
2. Don't dive straight in with abbreviations, like EP. Say "extended play" and put (EP) afterwards.
3. Try alternating with "The band" and "They" rather than repeat "Powderfinger" all the time... see Early work section - Powderfinger (the band) gets five mentions in quick succession.
4. Be careful to avoid overlinking - link in the lead perhaps and then the next time (e.g. ARIA seems to be linked first and third times).
5. You have "Other albums" section but what differentiates them from the albums in the previous table? Perhaps "Other releases"?

The Rambling Man (talk) 12:18, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Most of these changes made. The first one I'll get to at some point (same with album articles). I feel like the article needs a bit more content so I'm going to work on that too. Thanks for taking a look. —Giggy 12:13, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Just a quick note, readable prose is now up to 8.31KB. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:52, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

VGA

Passed vote at Wikipedia:Proposed very good articles/Archive 3#Powderfinger 2. Thanks to all who helped out! —Giggy 04:32, 24 August 2008 (UTC)