Template:Did you know nominations/How I Met Your Music (Original Songs from the Hit Series "How I Met Your Mother")

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:30, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

How I Met Your Music[edit]

(
)
  • ... that the first soundtrack album from How I Met Your Mother, titled How I Met Your Music, was originally only released through iTunes because the creators considered CDs to be "too 1992"? Source: Goldman, Eric (29 July 2012). "How I Met Your Mother Soundtrack Coming in September". IGN. Retrieved 9 April 2017.

Created by HeyJude70 (talk) and 7&6=thirteen (talk). Self-nominated at 16:05, 9 April 2017 (UTC).

  • Timely nominated. This article is a new track list, with virtually no content. Length in total bytes may comply with minimal requirements, but it is woefully devoid of content. If you excise the track list, we're talking 348 characters of countable text. No WP:QPQ alleged. I reformatted hook to put the track list in bold. I assume that is what the nominator is proposing. OTOH, hooks are is reliably sourced, neutral, and interesting. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:20, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
  • User talk:7&6=thirteen Added QPQ, however I completely ignored the lack of content in my own article. That's my mistake, my apologies. (Sorry for not pinging you, the template would not recognise your username)
QPQ confirmed. (Not yet promoted; not a requirement.) If you type {{User:7&6=thirteen}} it works. I added a little text, a block quote, and two sources. 926 characters, including the block quote (not sure if that even counts) (excluding the track list). Still thin gruel. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 23:19, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
As to the track list contents, it is verbatim lift from the ITunes website (absent the price of each download). I assume that is alright, as there is nothing that can be done about the song titles and artists names. But is deserves mention as a possible copyvio, even though it is typical of record track listing articles. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 00:13, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
As to both hooks ALT1, the sources show it was originally released only through ITunes. But an online search shows it is now available from Amazon.com so the ALT1 both hooks is are misleading. I sua sponte added the word "originally" to ALT1 both hooks. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 00:26, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
I added two paragraphs and a reference lifted (and credited) from How I met your mother. One of them needs a citation. Added another reference. This is still pretty short on content. Added content suggestions (including expanding article to directly cover the "Deluxe" version) on the article talk page. This might necessitate a rename of the article. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 01:26, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
  • New reviewer needed. Could not get the article creator to respond. However, I think I've taken care of the content issue. I've substantially expanded the article beyond the track list (2307 1538 characters, including the blockquote). 13,700+ 8,925< bytes total. As I wrote on the article's talk page, it also might be possible to add some other content. There is also an issue regarding the article's name (which is only sort of a DYK issue). I would now like to be listed as a co-creator of the article, and am withdrawing as a reviewer. Can't be helped. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:50, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Not reviewing, but I wanted to note this article still needs a lot of work. I've corrected some of the grammar and formatting but there are still problems in that regard. Most of the section "The series" has nothing to do with the album, and several critical opinions are presented as facts. This album appears to contain only original music from the show but the article is bloated with information (which reads like pieces of trivia) about the show's general use of music. 97198 (talk) 09:50, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
  • I have just updated this page to reflect the article move. 7&6=thirteen, are you planning to address the issues raised by 97198? It's been over four weeks. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:13, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
  • BlueMoonset The rename of the article (which is new and 14,610 15,199 bytes currently, far in excess of the DYK threshold) should answer all the concerns. I expanded the article and the lead.
The two albums are inextricably intertwined with the show's soundtrack.
I have diligently tried to find on line reviews of the album. No luck. Maybe somebody with HighBeam access can find them? Or access to Newspapers.com?
There is a lot of content. We could even add the playlist for the second album. But other than that, I am out of sources.
I think we are well in excess of the standard for DYK. A review is needed. If that isn't good enough then fail it. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:18, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
  • New reviewer needed to do a full review of the article. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:59, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Comment If you count the lead paragraph and the album section, we are well over 1700 characters. ("Articles must have a minimum of 1,500 characters of prose (ignoring infoboxes, categories, references, lists, and tables etc.) The number of characters may be measured using this script (most accurate) or this one or this tool.) And that does not count the infobox, playlist, reference, or all of the text about the series. There is enough there that it would qualify for DYK (1500 characters) just based on those portions alone. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:08, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
So just to clarify, since you didn't answer BlueMoonset's question above, you are not planning to fix the issues I mentioned above? 97198 (talk) 04:33, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
97198 To clarify, I think I both addressed and fixed the issues above. Article has been renamed, reformatted, and expanded. Hope that assuages your concerns. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 10:05, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
As far as I can tell each of the issues I raised still stand:
  1. "I've corrected some of the grammar and formatting but there are still problems in that regard."
  2. "Most of the section "The series" has nothing to do with the album, and several critical opinions are presented as facts."
  3. "This album appears to contain only original music from the show but the article is bloated with information (which reads like pieces of trivia) about the show's general use of music."
You seem to do a produce of good work here so I guess I'm just surprised that you think an article like this is ready to appear on the main page. 97198 (talk) 10:18, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
The show's use of music is covered by the article renaming. In any event, it is the context in which the album arises, and better informs the readers. I added as a topic sentence to one paragraph: "Critics have been effusive in their praise of the show's music." Moved the section you deem "trivia" to the end of the article; the violation of copyright is important. This is a case where relevance is in the eye of the beholder. We will have to agree to disagree. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 10:24, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
Edited out the "trivia" per your suggestion. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 10:46, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
It's looking slightly better now, and I trimmed a bit more. I still don't see why, in an article which begins with the bolded title How I Met Your Music (Original Songs from the Hit Series "How I Met Your Mother"), all of the detail about other music used in the show is relevant. Or how statements such as "The albums mirror the show's iconic prescient and well-placed choice of music" or "there are a great many impressive musical moments" are NPOV. Anyway, I'll step aside at this point since we seem unable to see eye-to-eye. 97198 (talk) 11:27, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

I appreciate your POV and have tried to address your criticism. Thanks for the copy editing. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:45, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

  • New reviewer still needed to do a full review of the article. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:43, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Sorry, I don't think this is ready to be on the main page, despite some solid work having gone into it. The timeliness, length, etc, check out; but as of now it is not neutrally written. I tend to use heavier editorial voice than most writers around here, and this is still too much for me. "The albums mirror the show's iconic prescient and well-placed choice of music." Even just that sentence is bad enough, but there's more like it. Vanamonde (talk) 14:46, 5 June 2017 (UTC)\
Vanamonde Thanks for the review. As you suggested, I copy edited to adjust for your criticism. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:15, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
Not quite, I'm afraid. Your changes were a marginal improvement, but the issues remain, in substance: and I suggest that if you are unable to see that this is the case, it is time to either find a person with a fresh set of eyes willing to go over the prose, or to let this go. I'm afraid I do not have the time. Vanamonde (talk) 15:40, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
  • The problem seems to be that the sources on this apparently beloved show (I've never seen it) are so lauditory that it's easy for the article to come out sounding promotional unintentionally. I'll see what I can do, but I can't take a serious look until Friday at the earliest. EEng 02:21, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. I did scale them back, but I am at a loss as to how to honestly water them down any further. I put in all of the relevant sources (favorable or not) that were available to me. Can you say "copyright violation", for example. I too have never watched the show, am not a fan, and have no axe to grind. The sources are what they are. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 10:50, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
7&6, just for the record, I am in no way suggesting that you have an axe to grind, and I understand that sometimes the sources are not ideal. Nonetheless, using an editorial voice this heavy is a problem. It's a problem with the article, not with you; which is precisely why I suggested that somebody else look at it, because sometimes editors find it difficult to step back and take a fresh look at what they have written. I am in no way immune to this issue. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 11:32, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
I've asked for help. I tried to address your issues. We will see how this washes out. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:36, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
  • I've tried to make is sound less in-voice enthusiastic. If someone wants me to go further, ping me. I hope this helps. EEng 19:46, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
  • @EEng: and 7&6, (why am I unable to ping you?) This is a lot better. The only remaining objection I have is to the term "oft-recognized" in the line "The albums mirror the show's oft-recognized thoughtful use of music." Vanamonde (talk) 07:13, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
"Oft-commented"? EEng 13:48, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
  • @EEng: The sense of that is much better, but good lord, do we really need to invent new words to get this on the main page? Just go with some plain English: "commentators have often said..." or any such. Vanamonde (talk) 04:57, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
My issues have been addressed. Vanamonde (talk) 13:31, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/How_I_Met_Your_Music_(Original_Songs_from_the_Hit_Series_%22How_I_Met_Your_Mother%22)&oldid=995522462"