Talk:Keith Moon/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Dr. Blofeld (talk · contribs) 15:55, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"ginger clothes". Ginger-coloured clothes? I'm sort of envisaging a ginger bread man with Moon's head LOL.

There's an interview with Pete Townshend included in The Kids Are Alright where he describes Moon as "this ginger vision". Let me go and find my DVD copy and I'll cite it. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 16:06, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, ginger vision sounds good!

Done Now cited. Forgot his hair was (allegedly) dyed ginger. Anyway, it's on the film alright, Pete claiming it as gospel in front of none other than Melvyn Bragg. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:20, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

an exaggerated accent" -what accent was this?

Done Should be "exaggerated character performance" as that's what the source says. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 19:28, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

" Moon also produced the song "Baba O'Riley"'s violin solo (which he had suggested), performed by Dave Arbus." Not exactly sure what you mean, did he produce the song or just the solo, he didn't play violin obviously, I thought it odd he would just produce a violin solo being a drummer, can you reword a little to make clearer?

All it says on the back of Who's Next is "Violin on Baba O'Riley produced by Keith Moon". I have a Classic Albums DVD where Dave Arbus actually explains the background to how Moon got a credit here, so I'll dig that out as the same time as the other DVD reference mentioned above. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 16:57, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find my copy of this DVD. I've made do with citing the original album sleeve (including record company's serial number) and an interview at a semi-reliable source. We might have to revisit this if the article gets nominated to FA. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 08:49, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think we're going to have to mark this as

Done for the time being. I'm amazed that Marsh's book, which is pretty comprehensive account of The Who up to 1982, doesn't even mention this. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 19:28, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"This new set widened his playing;" Do you mean broadened his playing musically or literally made him stretch further at each side on the drums, I'm guessing the latter based on him abandoning the hi?

DoneThis is fanpov - I've simplified it to the basic facts.

"notably the amber set in the films," what is an amber set? Amber-coloured drum kit?

DoneNot sourced, removed and simplified. The presence of the kits on the films will also need a cite

Wiki link Waldorf Hotel and RKO Theatre.

DoneThough Waldorf Hilton is borderline AfDable.

"after the incident at Newbury". Sorry, have I missed something earlier on, what incident?

Done This was the incident described in the second paragraph of "Destroying instruments and other stunts." I assume what happened here is that that paragraph originally stated the fracas took place in Newbury, but I couldn't find a source for it, so I took it out. I've reworded the sentence in question here. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 17:01, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Work outside The Who:Music section. I see you linked Los Angeles but didn't link London or New York City earlier on. I'd link them all, but can you either link the cities or not? Los Angeles is linked anyway in early career so that link can be removed in this section.

Done New York wikilinked, London was linked at the top of the article (it's where he was born!), unlinked duplicate of LA.

do a "treatment" for a "mad movie"" what is meant by this?

Done No idea. I've removed these two paragraphs for the minute as they're badly source (Malleus also considered them problematic when he had a look at the article). If I can find a good source, I'll redo this.

"Keith Moon is often cited by critics as one of the greatest and most eccentric drummers in rock music." Could use a few various sources by it just to back it up. Obviously true but you know what the wiki is likely with strong statements. If anything though I'd say it is a little undercooked as a section. As a rock drummer he is hugely influential, I think you could probably find a lot more to demonstrate his legacy on rock drumming, but not necessary for GA. I think you should mention him being voted #2 drummer at the end of the first paragraph in the lead though.

Done I've added a few more sources, and toned the wording down, so it just mentions some critics said good things about him in a more partisan manner. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 19:28, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For the references, ensure that all of the newspapers are consistent with linking and italics. Fill out sources 29, 31, 102, 104, 120, 121, 131 with publisher info, the date in one of them also needs fixing.

Done All of these sources would probably come up for criticism at FAC, being fansites or otherwise stuff that's not being scrutinised with a highly credible editorial control. In order :

29 and 31 are from WhoTabs which is self published, but only by a few select people who seem to be dedicated fans and self-check their own facts, so I'm happy to accept it. No mention of this site on WP:RSN
102 is a YouTube video - gone.
104 is from a Google Books search that annoyingly doesn't have pages on it. Publisher added.
120 is the ever unreliable IMDB - gone.
121 is a fansite - gone. In fact, doing a news and book search for "keith moon movie" reveals nothing on this project, so I'm going to declare it "suspicious" and remove all mention of it.
131 is a dead link - removed as the information is cited to another source.

An absolute pleasure to read, one of the most enjoyable reads for quite some time on here actually. Easily meets GA requirements and in my opinion a potential FA. Reading it again I'd say the music coverage is adequate actually and the article has a nice flow to it. Possibly you could broaden your range of sources before taking to FA, look in google books and HighBeam for anything if you haven't already just to ensure it is fully comprehensive, I did a similar thing on another lunatic. Some of the web sources I think could be replaced with better sources and I think the referencing will be a major issue if presented at FA for inconsistency. Anyway, I'll let you address these minor points first, although I'm sure if Malleus also takes a look at it he'll find a lot more than I have. I made most of the more trivial edits myself. ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 17:14, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I should be able to close all these issues down by the end of today. I agree that it would be better to see a broader array of sources for FAC, particularly the "Amazing Journey" DVD and some other books. Fletcher is a great source, and a joy to read, but it's 15 years old and new anecdotes may have come to light since then. I see Malleus has done a few copyedits, so he's obviously interested in helping it get into shape for being a FA candidate too. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 08:49, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you say "done" for each point here when it has been addressed so I know where we are? Cheers.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 09:25, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:00, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think all the issues are resolved now, so have a look through and check there's nothing else we've left out. Thanks for getting the review done in record quick time, too. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 19:34, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

No serious problems I can see preventing this from passing GA. I definitely sniff an FA somewhere down the line but I think the biggest issue will be the sourcing. Two suggestions would be to try to scout for as many sources as possible by looking in google books and High Beam research. I think it could probably be even more comprehensive. I can help you out on this if you like. The second will be to replace some of the sources which aren't as good as the books and try to replace them with better sources, but overall you're most certainly on the right track. Excellent job.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 21:16, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've given Kim McLagan a shot in the arm this evening, and I feel Dougal Butler is getting notable enough to have his own article too. I'll take a break for a week or two, and then start attacking the sources with aplomb for FAC. I think we need Marsh, Fletcher, Barnes, Neill&Kent, and the Amazing Journey DVD (ie: Daltrey/Townshend). I would still take Fletcher as the best source, and throw in stuff from other four to complement it. Then I'll think about putting all the facts together in a cohesive narrative, get Malleus to give it a good going over (oo-er), and then, FAC it. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 22:02, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"oo-er" is right, but congratulations anyway. I'd have to say though that Keith Moon infuriated me, and I say that as a fan of The Who's music and a fellow Mod. Malleus Fatuorum 22:07, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers for the hand you had in this. If you haven't got Fletcher's book, grab a copy and devote a couple of evenings to digest it, it really is a good read. Some of it, though, is quite sad, particularly to see the sort of state he got himself into by the mid 1970s, and the abuse he threw at Kim is frankly shocking and unacceptable. As I was going through sourcing it, there were several occasions where I thought "what an asshole." Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 22:34, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't need to read Fletcher's book to know that Moon was an asshole, but this is a discussion for elsewhere. Malleus Fatuorum 23:01, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]