Talk:Good Monsters

NPOV?

The article as it currently stands reads more like a press release than an encyclopedia article. I cleaned up some of it (the parts that didn't require complete sentence rewrites), but it still needs work. -- Fru1tbat 01:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, it looks like it was copied and pasted. -Nbfan

Where to start?

Sheesh, I don't know where to start with cleaning this article up. Here's a few pointers if someone would like to run with the ball:

• "Good Monsters is considered as The Joshua Tree of Jars of Clay." - says who?
• "...stretches the imagination and offers a new perspective on who we are as church today..." - whose we? Too promotional lead-in to this paragraph.
• "...was serviced to CHR formats on June 23rd, and AC formats on July 7th." What's CHR? AC? Do we care?
• "Additionally, mainstream radio promotional efforts are pending at this date, as well as plans for an extensive fall tour." - Useless info, except perhaps for the tour, if fall (autumn ;) ) isn't over yet...

Album of the Year

• "..have a bit of fun with the process" - cool, but is it relevant here? Perhaps more apt as a response to an interview question.
• "amid tremendous applause" - not NPOV, although there's certainly enough accolades.
• Ugh, the rest of this section just need serious rewriting.

Good Monsters for Africa

• Good paragraph, stylistically the best of the three.

Hope this helps. Brilliant album, lovely anointing from it -- especially the latter parts. Can kick myself that I didn't see them here in South Africa when they toured.

- Lohanj 09:17, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

WP:COPYVIO?

The long section that begins "In order to find balance, neither of two sides can exist without the other" is taken directly from the band's official website, unedited (found under "The Band"; as it seems the entire site is a single flash applet, there's no direct link to it). I've removed it twice now, as I believe it's a copyright violation. If this were just a minor content/wording dispute, I wouldn't be so quick to remove it, but as it seems to be a potential legal issue, I think it's important not to let it sit around on the article. I've also removed the "Joshua Tree" line that had previously been removed, as it's still uncited. If anyone feels either of these items should be included, please discuss it here first. --Fru1tbat 13:58, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

UPDATE: I've also edited down two other sections for similar (but not identical) reasons. They seem to be from press releases, so I'm not quite sure what fair use is, but the article wasn't served by most of the information anyway (most of it was just background on the band or PR-ese). I merged and kept where I thought appropriate. --Fru1tbat 14:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

"Christian rock", shouldn't it say so?

I'm just wondering why this article doesn't make it especially clear to the non-initiated that this is indeed "Christian rock" -- or CCM, or whatever euphemism is preferred. The infobox simply says "Rock" and the article doesn't use the word "Christian" until quite far down the page, talking about awards. Is this article saying that rock music fans would enjoy this music as rock music, regardless of the content of the lyrics? Is this group trying to fly under the radar? Or is it just that "everyone knows" that this is Christian rock and didn't think it was necessary to say so? Well, I'd like it to say so, but I'm not sure where that information should go. Any ideas? Accounting4Taste 22:21, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

The group has never been under or off the radar. They're not a Christian Band, like Third Day or dc Talk. They're an alt-rock/art-rock/folk-rock group who sings about what's nearest to their hearst, which in many cases (though not all - listen to Collide) are about God and their Faith. Many other artists are like this but are not pigeonholed as they have been, possibly due to the ardency of their faith, and the quentionability of the seriousness and honour (by which I mean weight) of the faith of others such as Beyonce or Clay Aiken. So to call this a Christian album would actually be more of a misnomer than to call it a rock album. --linca^linca 04:15, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

curious

a lot of songs on here (and heck, a lot of jars of clay songs) seem to focus on water/tears. could that have to do with their work in africa? Bouncehoper 01:49, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Blood:Water Mission? Possibly. Nothing's directly attributing the fact, but it's likely. Do some research and if you find something confirming the suspicion, pop it on the page. --linca^linca 04:17, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

groovy. i mean, there's so many water references...it's kinda strange. Bouncehoper 05:09, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

released?

I know I've heard this on radio; has it been officially released?

I plan on checking Billboard at some point...but just wondering if anyone knew...

Bouncehoper (talk) 09:49, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Good Monsters. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120510063523/http://ht.salemweb.net/ccm/ccmmagazine/pdf/200609.pdf to http://ht.salemweb.net/ccm/ccmmagazine/pdf/200609.pdf

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

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 02:37, 21 October 2017 (UTC)