Jump to content

Wikipedia:Peer review/The Carpenters/archive4

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Carpenters

[edit]
Previous peer review
Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

The Carpenters is one of those groups that has generated a mixed reaction, particularly from dyed-in-the-wool rock fans who only listen to "real" music. However, they had genuine musical talent, their material has stood the test of time, and they are not as looked down as they once were. Sadly, no amount of critical reappraisal is going to bring back Karen Carpenter, and listening to some of her best singing in hindsight is quite harrowing in places.

This article has had a couple of goes at FAC about a decade ago, so the time is ripe for us to give it another go. Since then, Randy Schmidt has written a critically acclaimed biography that deserves its place in the few really good books about the duo. I could probably get this through GAN without too much difficulty, but it does strike me that this is an important enough article that going for the gold star really is a worthwhile exercise.

All comments welcome. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:20, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments I'm going to go through and copyedit, bits I can't really get to grips with or provide an easy-win solution I'll post here.

How about : "He was asked to be the organist for weddings and services at the local Methodist church; instead of playing..." ? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:11, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, I didn't see the bit where "he was asked" in the original text, but that reword is fine. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:13, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It's in the original source, I don't have it in front of me, but basically the church were looking for an organist and his mum said "ooh, my son can do it". As mums tend to do. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:23, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It was - I think my concern here was writing "trio" twice in the same sentence, but I found a way round that. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:35, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The trio were purely instrumental at this point; Richard's friend Dan Friberg occasionally filled in on trumpet, along with guest vocalist Margaret Shanor..." and "but realised she most enjoyed performing Richard's new material" so this implies that although the trio were "purely instrumental", the work that Richard was writing did include lyrics? The Rambling Man (talk) 10:50, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Technically the two guests weren't part of the trio, the idea being put forward here is that neither Karen or Richard sang, which the casual reader may not expect. I've tweaked this a bit - does that clear up things? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:56, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I've reworded this a bit Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:38, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I checked a dictionary, then realised I could just used "sent" and tighten the sentence up anyway. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:59, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Grateful Dead, Jefferson Airplane, Big Brother and the Holding Company, plus The Who and The Rolling Stones from that area; I've put in psychedelic rock as that's what the source actually says. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:59, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Now have a newspaper ref with the finals for the program featuring "The Dick Carpenter Trio". We hope (talk) 19:57, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
DING DING DING - we've hit the elephant in the room. Officially the group have only ever been called "Carpenters"; they are only called "The Carpenters" because every single reliable source going refers to them as such. If you look back in the talk page archives, you'll find a couple of requested moves and heated arguments about this. Which begs the question - what should we do? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:59, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Trimmed Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:14, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Copyedited Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:14, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Between the trio and Spectrum, Richard and Bettis worked at a refreshment shop in Disneyland. The pair played banjo and piano, singing turn of the 20th century songs, as the theme of the shop was of that era. The kids made the mistake of honoring modern song requests a number of times and played things like "Light My Fire" when they should have politely refused. Guder was their supervisor and he fired them for being too radical. Bettis and Carpenter wrote the song about him because of their dismissal. I can put this in or the phase can be removed-your call. We hope (talk) 12:30, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well since it seems (to me at least) to be a rarity (like Beatle's Taxman and Queen's Death on Two Legs (Dedicated to...)) in the Carpenters' catalogue, it should stay and be embellished. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:34, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK-I think the bulk of this can be worked into the text between the trio and Spectrum and then the reference to the song "Mr. Guder" will then make sense when it comes up later in the article. Imagine a Carpenter being fired for being too radical ! :-D We hope (talk) 12:45, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK-Mr. Guder is here. ;) We hope (talk) 14:05, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The track is listed as "Mr Guder" without the period. Is that correct? 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 21:01, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I amended myself, please revert if incorrect. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 21:34, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Also, when I read the original, it wasn't clear that they had been fired. I thought he was dismissive of their music (so many were...). We hope's explanation above provides necessary clarity. Additionally, "popular music" is ambiguous, because they were indeed supposed to be playing popular music, just popular music from 50-100 years earlier. Can we provide clarity that they were fired for playing current (at the time) popular music that was deemed to not fit the Disney image? 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 21:06, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Here's the lowdown from their official website. The clipping from the Aiken Standard says they were fired for playing current hits. "The audience demanded pop music. Richard and John gave in...They were promptly fired." The Stanton book ref is where "too radical" comes from. It mentions that they were slipping in some Beatles songs while playing the old favorites. :) We hope (talk) 21:22, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yes, I forgot non-station articles also can have figures that might need inflating for context. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:17, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Spaces, please Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:22, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The latter - although "Hot 100" is not really needed here as the context is explained later in the paragraph. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:22, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I found another source that talks a bit more about it, and spiced it up a bit with some detail and guests. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:43, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • " and Colin Paul and Taylor Mary...." this whole sentence reads a little odd to me, we're assuming your talking about Richard's kids, the first few bits are okay, but then this "and and" feels strange. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:31, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The original house was featured on the cover of Now & Then " if Now & Then is insufficiently notable for an article, why is it worth noting that here? Also, what "one fan" said seems hardly important (although I accept the quote is a fine one). The Rambling Man (talk) 13:35, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Er - Now & Then (The Carpenters album) ? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:59, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Tsk, shouldn't try doing three things at once these days. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:02, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed It Should - I Have Fixed That Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:00, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
According to our article, yes, but I can't find a reliable source for that, though that doesn't mean it didn't happen. I need to get hold of Guinness British Hit Albums or whatever it's called these days. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:22, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Public image section covers all the awards, but yet you have an awards section for that. It would suffice to say they were critically recognised by both Grammy and Emmy in this section I guess. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:06, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    More: you don't have an awards section, you have a Grammy section. Is there a separate Carpenters' awards article? If not, the Emmy and the AMA and anything else should be covered here. If so, ditch that section and just link out to the awards, covering the major ones in prose. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:09, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That would be List of awards and nominations received by the Carpenters (per most other awards list articles I have encountered) - as the article is on about 46 - 47K of prose at the moment, I wouldn't be averse to splitting the list into a separate article. I'm not really a list man, as you might have gathered. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:18, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
More to the point, is this figure important? This sort of trivia is what gives rise to silly edit wars, after all. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:21, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, I would avoid noting it at all then. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:25, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"ten" here is referring to the albums released during the duo's active career (ie: Ticket to Ride, Close to You, Carpenters, A Song for You, Now & Then, Horizon, A Kind of Hush, Passage, Christmas Portrait and Made in America) and not posthumous stuff. I'm not saying that's right or wrong per se; rather that's probably where the claim originated. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:21, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Because it's not mentioned anywhere in the body, and I left it there as a reminder to fact-check it and get a more up to date source than 2010, then put that in the body. Except I forgot. Oops. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:39, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'm done I think. It's nice to read, comprehensive and shouldn't be too difficult to get through FAC, but it's been a while since I've tried anything like that so who knows. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:27, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article currently states that "Richard [...] wrote an arrangement from scratch without being influenced by any earlier recordings", sourced from Schmidt. I don't know what the source states exactly, though the article statement seems a little misleading, given what Richard states in this documentary (from about 13:45), regarding the instruction from Alpert to retain the distinctive piano flourishes after the first bridge. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 18:20, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Our article on the song says it was a collaborative effort, but without any source. This source says Bacharach gave Richard a lead sheet and that was it. This Billboard interview says "One day I arranged the whole thing and Karen and I went into the studio to record it." Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:28, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: I think everything's now in order, except for the sentence "Kristi Lynn (the name Karen intended for a daughter had she had one) was born on August 17, 1987, Traci Tatum on July 25, 1989, Mindi Karen (named after her late aunt) on July 7, 1992, and Colin Paul and Taylor Mary", which I'm still unsure as to what we should do with it. Also, I think the short "Logo" section, with a repetition of the band's logo in the infobox, would come in for at least some criticism at FAC. And there's the "elephant in the room" about "Carpenters" vs "The Carpenters" which is still kind of swept under the rug, and would only take one comment at a FA review for all hell to break loose. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:00, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@We hope: Any further comments, or should we just wait for this to close and then bite the bullet at FAC? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:25, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ritchie333: I think mostly everything that was brought up here has been taken care of and that TRM is on target re: the logo and The Carpenters vs Carpenters. Those questions can be decided at FAC. We hope (talk) 12:28, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ritchie, sorry I haven't been back for a while. I'd FAC it. The elephant in the room may necessitate work there, but it's better to get a consensus at the FAC and resolve it there than make a decision here which is only reversed later on... Good luck. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:57, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hokay, shall we just wait for the PR to close of its own accord, or can you manually close one? I can't remember. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:42, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a manually closed one. We hope (talk) 16:04, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/The_Carpenters/archive4&oldid=1138566056"