Jump to content

Talk:Futures (album)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fair use rationale for Image:Futures.jpeg

[edit]

Image:Futures.jpeg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 11:07, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Futues.jpg

[edit]

Image:Futues.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 01:42, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Punk?

[edit]

Seriously, who put punk on the genres here? seriously, it is nowhere near "punk" at all. its like your just adding genres like tht, to make it look better but doesnt actually describe the music at all.

signed, loveyourfaith

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Futures (album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:24, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Futures (album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:14, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
Passed. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 20:06, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Futures (album)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sammi Brie (talk · contribs) 17:48, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA review
(see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):
    b (citations to reliable sources):
    c (OR):
    d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):
    b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
    b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

Overall:
Pass/Fail:

· · ·


This is almost ready. A bunch of mostly minor copy changes, and there is also one citation I'd like to see improved. 7-day hold to MusicforthePeople. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 18:19, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copy changes

[edit]

Issues with a (C in S) tag refer to User:Sammi Brie/Commas in sentences.

Lead

[edit]
  • The sessions lasted from February to May 2004, and were held Remove comma (C in S)
  • "Pain" was later certified gold by the RIAA, and peaked at number 93 Remove comma (C in S)

Background

[edit]
  • The group reached a breaking point with Trombino as they ran out of song ideas; and their disagreements led to Trombino's departure from the project Remove the "and", which you don't need when joining sentences with a semicolon.
  • Believe in What You, a stop-gap video/live-album was Complete the appositive by adding a comma after "album".

Production

[edit]
  • Jimmy Eat World re-grouped sometime after, and wrote "Work", "Pain", "Polaris", and "23". Remove comma (C in S)
  • Pre-production started and lasted for a month, before recording Not a C in S issue but remove the comma.
  • Consider linking Tucson, Arizona and Tempe, Arizona
  • Sessions were concluded in May 2004, with mixing taking place in mid-June, which took a month to do,. Is this a month beginning in mid-June? This could be reworded.

Composition

[edit]
  • It was most of the earliest songs written for the album, which ended up receiving constant minor changes during the writing process. Does this refer to "Just Tonight"? The "most" probably should be "one". I'd also consider replacing ", which" with "and".
Made it clearer that the line is referring to "Just Tonight..." MusicforthePeople (talk) 18:44, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • It features strings that were arranged by David Campbell, and was compared to the work of Death Cab for Cutie Remove comma (C in S)

Release

[edit]
  • The video, which premiered on September 14, through Launch.com, was The second comma should be removed.
  • On October 11, Futures was made available for streaming through MTV's website, before being released on October 19 through Interscope Records. The second comma should be removed.
  • In 2021, the band is set to perform the album in its entirety again, alongside 2019's Surviving and 1999's Clarity. This sentence needs updating.

Sources and copyvio checks

[edit]

Earwig returns no issues. The highest percentage similarity is 18%, and the top three pages have that because they are quoted.

I do suggest converting from "last, first" in the |author= parameter to using |last= and |first= in citation templates.

Spot checks

[edit]

I randomly selected 10 footnote numbers for spot checks. All check out. One should have citation information changed to be more specific.

  • 22: Once translated, I can see that the Laut interview backs all the claims this is used for.
  • 32: Characterization as "pop rock": "the ultimate pop-rock break-up album"
  • 36: Matches "atmospheric" mention and nod to Clarity
  • 39: This review checks out. I see that the link is a clipping of a review scanned from a magazine, yet the magazine is not mentioned in the citation information where it should be. I'd suggest changing this. Per the file name, this is a review done by John Doran for Metal Hammer in its October 2004 issue. Is this publication available somewhere to get the page number?
Like a lot of magazines, the publication's back issues aren't available online. I would have to track down the specific issue to get the page number. MusicforthePeople (talk) 18:44, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • 42: Quote of Adkins checks out.
  • 64: FMQB listing shows "Work" under 12.6-7 as being released to radio.
  • 65: AGF on offline source (sleeve).
  • 92: Australian-Charts.com. This checks out. I suppose this is an accepted RS for summarizing these charts?
This is one of several similarly named websites that is widely used for various album/single chart information, per Template:Album_chart#Supports. See also: Wikipedia:Record charts. MusicforthePeople (talk) 18:44, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sweet, just checking. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 20:05, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • 97: Alternative Airplay chart history checks out.
  • 102: 2004 Spartanburg Herald-Journal article checks out.

Other items

[edit]
  • References are archived.
  • There are two images. One is the non-free album cover with appropriate rationale; the other is of a concert. Both have alt text.
@Sammi Brie: I've made the changes. MusicforthePeople (talk) 18:44, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Jack Frost (talk) 11:32, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

* ... that disagreements with the pre-production of Futures caused their producer Mark Trombino to leave and be replaced by Gil Norton? Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20100904045900/http://www.jimmyeatworld.com/press/10_04_Mean_Street.html , https://consequence.net/2021/07/dissected-jimmy-eat-world-with-jim-adkins/ , https://web.archive.org/web/20041204231436/http://www.popmatters.com/music/interviews/041130-jimmyeatworld.shtml

Improved to Good Article status by MusicforthePeople (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 13:32, 10 October 2022 (UTC).[reply]


General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Valereee (talk) 16:49, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good to go for ALT1, which I agree makes the hook clearer and more interesting. Valereee (talk) 17:00, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Onegreatjoke and Valereee: I'm not really sure about this. The hook doesn't seem to be that interesting if you're unfamiliar with Trombino, Norton, or Jimmy Eat World. Maybe a different direction can be proposed here? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:06, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately the average album article doesn't actually have much that's interesting to a non-fan. Some people wrote music and recorded it, and some of the music became popular. It's basically 'people did their jobs'. Notable, but not particularly interesting to anyone who isn't a fan. Changing producers midway is about the only thing out of the ordinary in this subject. Valereee (talk) 14:41, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but that's not exactly uncommon in the music world (or in entertainment for that matter). Having a change in producer without context isn't necessarily interesting enough for DYK purposes. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:57, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, hell...wait a minute. This article isn't new enough. How the heck...? How the heck did I manage that? Failing it. Valereee (talk) 14:47, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Valereee: Actually, the article was nominated as a newly-promoted GA. The article was promoted on October 7th and was nominated for DYK on the 10th, so was still eligible at the time of the nomination. But yeah, my main concern here is really the hook rather than the nomination date. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:57, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Man, I am not firing on all cylinders today lol...I'll support a fail for nothing interesting to say, if there isn't anything to build a hook around, and in this case I don't actually see anything more interesting. I really do think we need to be discouraging nominating an article simply because it's eligible. Valereee (talk) 15:29, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Valereee: @Narutolovehinata5: Honestly I think i might just withdraw this nomination. When I nominated this back in October 10th I really just wanted to get a DYK out. Personally, I always felt sad that most GAs don't become DYKs so I decided nominate this as what I believe to be my third DYK nomination. Now that I think about, I'm not really proud of this nomination at all as I was grasping for straws trying to get a GA to DYK. It's not like I'm doing something terribly wrong though as my GA to DYK noms of Jennie Scott Griffiths and Betty Hall all got promoted even though I only really nominated them because they were eligible. I am still new to wikipedia as although I created my account in May of this year I only started getting active late august-early september so I'm still new to this whole wikipedia thing. So unless @Musicforthepeople: can pull a hook out of thin air I think you're going to have to fail this nomination. Onegreatjoke (talk) 02:57, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Per the above comment it doesn't seem like there is a path forward for the nomination anymore. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:11, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think that sounds okay, but as Valereee is the original reviewer I'd defer to her on the decision. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 21:34, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Valereee: Would you approve Roysmith's suggested hook? Onegreatjoke (talk) 16:16, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

for ALT2a. Sorry for the delay, been on the road the past three days. Valereee (talk) 19:30, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Futures_(album)&oldid=1211189528"