Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Concert in Central Park/archive1

The Concert in Central Park

Nominator(s): GoP_T^C_{N 13:39, 13 June 2012 (UTC)}[reply]

500,000 spectators visited this free (and legendary) concert to help rebuild the park. It is the 7th most attended concert ever and marked a temporary reunion of the influential duo, Simon & Garfunkel. The article was copyedited by User:Wehwalt, User:Yngvadottir, User:Jmg38 among others. I believe it is a comprehensive article, the pictures meets criteria, well-written, well-reearched and follows the MOS. Happy editing! GoP_T^C_{N 13:39, 13 June 2012 (UTC)}[reply]

Support I did a copyedit and helped out at the GAN. I will continue to copyedit, but I think it's a strong candidate with an article that resonates with me as that album is very much a part of my youth. Rather than final prose comments, I will take the liberty of editing directly (most likely tonight).--Wehwalt (talk) 14:26, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This is a WikiCup nomination. The following nominators are WikiCup participants: GreatOrangePumpkin. To the nominator: if you do not intend to submit this article at the WikiCup, feel free to remove this notice. UcuchaBot (talk) 00:01, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment (thorough review later):

The number of songs is confusing. Lead has "The show consisted of 22 songs". Section Events has first "Overall, Simon & Garfunkel played twenty songs: ..." and later in the same section "17 songs + encore of 3 + encore of 1" (paraphrased = 21).

2 were not played. The lead does not state they played all 22 songs, but just that the show consisted of 22 songs. And the track listing was confusing as some ip included the duration of the two songs [1]. Also you are correct; they played 21, not 22. I changed that.--GoP_T^C_{N 15:52, 14 June 2012 (UTC)}[reply]

Events: "... encore [from] three songs." => "... encore of three songs." sounds better.

Done

Section title "track listing" (for recorded songs) doesn't work well, as the article includes titles, which were specifically not on the album - would "Set list" (for the concert) be the better section header here?

Agree, changed to "set list"

First sentence of Track listing has "... in this album". It's a new section and previous text mostly covered only the concert. So "... in the live album" or similar would be more specific to refocus on the album itself. GermanJoe (talk) 08:23, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thanks for your comments so far. --GoP_T^C_{N 15:52, 14 June 2012 (UTC)}[reply]

Comments by Ling
- Aftermath section: a few comments below, but actually I think this section is simply too long. A lot of discussion about topics that should be in some other article(s).
  - "Immediately after the concert, Simon and Garfunkel were disappointed." In what?
    - They forgot to go to the lavatory before the concert.
  - "For a long time they both performed only individually." Vague. Was it two decades, or...? – Ling.Nut (talk) 03:35, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Individually, meaning here and then
      - "For a long time" is vague. And I don't know what "here and then" in your response means.– Ling.Nut (talk) 07:23, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Please look at the whole Preservation of Central Park section carefully. "promised to donate 250,000", "rain evolved into a rainfall", "was near to be" etc. But actually, I do not think this section is germane to this article, and suggest removing it completely, except for one or two sentences about S&G, which could be relocated. – Ling.Nut (talk) 03:43, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Will wait for suggestions
      - I have two suggestions, though they are mutually exclusive: First, I suggest you simply delete the section, retaining one or two of the more relevant sentences. Barring that (and I do sincerely hope that you do not bar that!), I suggest that someone should have a go at an additional round of copy editing, starting from the bottom of the page and working upward. – Ling.Nut (talk) 07:23, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Critical reception
  - "Stephen Holden, in The New York Times the day after the concert, and in Rolling Stone magazine concerning the live album, praised the performance." Move verb phrase to position behind subject for crispness/clarity/balance.
    - Done
  - "romantic-sweetish pop musician Garfunkel and the gloomy, rock 'n' roll-leaning Simon complemented each other perfectly, despite their different styles" Is this close paraphrase?
    - It is indirect speech
  - "He felt that the new arrangements for the Simon songs clearly improved them" Unnecessary pronoun: He felt that the new arrangements clearly improved the Simon songs... Also: "the Simon songs" == songs penned by Simon, or Simon's songs, or...
    - Done
  - When presenting the reviews, the article sometimes seems to speak with Wikipedia's voice by leaving content unattributed. I know you are trying to avoid too many "he said, she stated" etc., but... perhaps another approach?– Ling.Nut (talk) 03:55, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Why another approach?--GoP_T^C_{N 07:13, 15 June 2012 (UTC)}[reply]
- Concert
  - "Particular parts of songs, in which the lyrics refer to the city of New York or the concert, were met by the audience with applause, for example a line from Garfunkel's ode to his home city in "A Heart in New York", which describes from a New Yorker's point of view the first glimpse of the city when returning by air and also refers to the bad state of Central Park" Vague expressions like "particular parts" and "bad state"; arguably a run-on sentence; etc. Writing needs to be sharpened.– Ling.Nut (talk) 03:59, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]