Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hi-5 (Australian band)/archive4

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 24 January 2021 [1].

Hi-5 (Australian band)

edit
Nominator(s): SatDis (talk) 07:02, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the Australian children's musical group Hi-5 - they once rivalled the Wiggles in popularity, but as of this year, the band is inactive, ending a 20 year run. The page reached Good Article status in 2016, and I have worked on it for 5 years now. This is the 4th attempt at a Featured Article nomination, however, my most recent attempt was hindered due to minimal comments on the review. Now that I am more familiar with the process, having just secured my first FA with Bluey (2018 TV series), I believe that I will be able to secure more comments on this review. I am fully committed to the process, ready to collaborate with other editors, and have seeked out the involvement of mentors through a very successful and detailed peer review which has just been closed.

@Aoba47: and @SandyGeorgia: I am so grateful for your guidance through the most recent peer review, and would appreciate your continued feedback here.
@Casliber: @Dweller: @HĐ: @Nick-D: @Shaidar cuebiyar: @Aircorn: Thank you to these editors who have all been involved in GA reviews, FA nominations and peer reviews of this article in the past. If you are able to, I hope you will provide your feedback to the article again.

Looking forward to feedback. Thanks in advance! SatDis (talk) 07:02, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article was also copy-edited through the Guild of Copy Editors by @Twofingered Typist: SatDis (talk) 07:08, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SandyGeorgia: Just a reminder to leave some comments if you are able to. Thank you in advance! SatDis (talk) 21:44, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My policy when I have previously engaged an article (on talk or at peer review) is to wait until uninvolved editors have been through, as they will likely see things that I didn't. Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:07, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@SandyGeorgia: Thanks for letting me know! SatDis (talk) 22:23, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@SandyGeorgia: Apologies for the ping again. Just wondering if there's been enough traction for you to leave comments now? I'm eagerly awaiting feedback. Thanks. SatDis (talk) 15:17, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments from Aoba47

edit

Comments move to the talk page. Aoba47 (talk) 22:52, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's it for all of my comments. I thought I might as well finish the review today. I am only focusing on the prose as I am not familiar with the publications being used as I am not from that area. I hope these comments are helpful, and have a great start to your week! Aoba47 (talk) 19:49, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you for the responses to everything. The only point remaining is that there are three "with +ing" sentence constructions in there that could be corrected. Once that point is addressed, I will be more than happy to support this for promotion. I hope this FAC does better this time around given all of the work you have put into it over the years. Aoba47 (talk) 18:40, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks so much for the comments @Aoba47: I have changed those -ing sentences. I really appreciate it, and I will definitely be working hard to make sure this article gets more comments this time around! SatDis (talk) 21:43, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support

edit

As I am increasingly busy irl, there will be a delay in my review. Placing this as a placeholder. On first glance, the article is in good shape for FA. As I voiced my support for this article based on prose (May 2019 FAC), I'm hoping to support on prose again. As mentioned by another review in the previous FAC, however, there may be spotcheck issues, which I'll leave to the source reviewer, HĐ (talk) 10:42, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • I believe then-record should be avoided unless a mention of who broke the record and when it was broken is there
  • Fixed.
  • I am dubious if the personal relationships between members (i.e. Crawford and Foley's planned marriage) are necessary here
  • Hmm, okay. Other FA the Wiggles mentions the wedding of two of its members, but I will remove if you think I should.
  • Overall the flow is easy to follow, which I think is excellent
  • Thankyou! I've spent a lot of time on perfecting this.
  • Are there any info on "iconic" songs or performances by the band?
  • Not so much performances, though I have mentioned the Sydney Opera House as a highlight venue. Hard to find reliable sources about iconic songs which aren't advertisements.
  • I think a link to A$ is needed
  • Have linked on first time in lead and prose.
  • I will not be reviewing sources, but I have some concerns with Twitter as a source used in this article.

Overall that's all I have. A well written article! Will be happy to support once my concerns have been addressed, HĐ (talk) 03:49, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I did not realize the Stevie Nicholson tweet was not about himself; I agree that his tweet cannot be used to source a fact about other members. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:56, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • No worries, have removed that Twitter reference but kept the other one as it's from the official account.
  • Thanks @HĐ: I have addressed your comments. Please let me know if anything was missed. SatDis (talk) 04:28, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from Le Panini

edit

As per request from my featured article review, I'll leave some comments that will eventually lead to a support. It's a good article, hence the GA promotion, and have little to pick at. This could be nitpicky depending on how you view it. This list isn't really organized, as I kinda just jumped around.

A featured article review is for articles that need to have their already-conferred FA status re-evaluated. Yours is a featured article candidate. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:46, 21 December 2020 (UTC) [reply]
  • The article should have a short description.
  • Thanks for picking that up.
  • "In July 2006, de Leon Jones said she was intent on returning to Hi-5, however, in July 2007, made the decision to leave the group permanently to focus on being a mother." This should be split, using either a period or a semicolon.
  • Done.
  • The sentences about Crawford and Foley's relationship floats between two paragraphs, and should be merged to one of them.
  • Have moved these.
  • Is there citation for the sentence Hi-5 continued to film one television series and record one album each year.?
  • No, I have removed this line.
  • "Four of their albums reached the top 10 on the ARIA Albums Chart; It's a Party (number four, July 2000), Boom Boom Beat (number three, August 2001), It's a Hi-5 Christmas (number four, December 2001) and Hi-5 Hits (number ten, July 2003)." Why are these not organized in any numeric order? I think the sentence would flow better with it, but probably not.
  • I have listed these in order of their release, which I think flows nicely. Let me know how you might word it if it were changed.

But seriously, fix these and a support from me. Good job! Le Panini [🥪] 05:31, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Great article! You have a support from me. Le Panini [🥪] 15:51, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Heartfox

edit
  • created the television series for the Nine Network → they actually created it specifically for Nine?
  • Yes, they pitched it to Nine and I have cited the source again to make this clear.
  • Ref 2: Do you have access to Newspapers.com? If so you should clip the article rather than linking to the page. The citation should also include via=Newspapers.com regardless. I can clip it if you don't have access. Additionally, the newspaper is The Sun-Herald, not The Sydney Morning Herald.
  • Really? Thanks. I have changed to The Sun-Herald, but the page I was reading said The Sydney Morning Herald. I only have access to the OCR transcripted on that web page, but I am unsure what you mean with "clipped"... I would appreciate your help.
  • Ref 3: The date says November 19 for me, not November 18 (maybe time zone difference?). It does not refer to her as the co-creator.
  • Fixed.
  • Ref 5: it only goes to page 8?
  • Error with the chapter archiving - this is now been fixed.
  • Ref 7: She doesn't say it "could", she says it does.
  • Fixed.
  • The band's work had multiple layers → like what?
  • Have removed mention of layers as it is ambiguous.
  • Ref 8 doesn't mention the editors given in the citation
  • Removed, was previously added in GA review.
  • Ref 4: pages 41–42 cited don't mention them intending to act as older siblings
  • Thanks for picking up, have amended as it was on page 40
  • Harris's inspiration for Hi-5 came partly from living in England, where she realised she could develop a show with universal appeal and accessible themes such as family and animals. → her quote could be better explained than this (right now I don't know what living in England and the realization she could develop a show with universal appeal have to do with each other)
  • Have changed to Harris was inspired develop a show with universal appeal and accessible themes such as family and animals.
  • She strove to incorporate items of current interest → like what? are we talking current events, news stories, pop culture references, etc.??
  • Have updated to She strove to allude to items of current interest (such as relevant curriculum as well as popular jokes, films and music) as supported by the reference.
  • Fixed.
  • I know sources differ but it's kind of hard to understand what the target audience is when some sentences say 2–8 year olds and others only refer to preschoolers.
  • The target audience is 2–8 year old (that is referenced), but I think it's important to keep preschool, for reasons such as awards in the "Best Preschool Program" category (which is also referenced).
  • The creators saw the need for "life-affirming" television for rapidly maturing preschoolers and found most children learned from shows which incorporated movement and song. → How were pages 131–151 accessed when the given URL only goes to page 8?
  • Again, this relates to the issue addressed above. Chapter 6 features pages 131–151 and this has now been fixed.
  • was produced in mid 1998 → I think there's supposed to be a dash (mid-1998)
  • Fixed.
  • After auditions for the group in June 1998 (narrowing down around 300 people to only five), the television pilot for Hi-5 was produced in mid 1998, with the original cast consisting of Kellie Crawford (née Hoggart), Kathleen de Leon Jones, Nathan Foley, Tim Harding and Charli Robinson, who were aged between 18 and 24 at the time of filming. → This should definitely be split into two sentences.
  • Now split.
  • with the original cast consisting of Kellie Crawford (née Hoggart), Kathleen de Leon Jones, Nathan Foley, Tim Harding and Charli Robinson, → not in source
  • Have added correct source
  • who were aged between 18 and 24 at the time of filming → I think it's kind of original research to assume they were 18–24 at the time of filming when the source says the "cast are aged between 19 and 25" in September 1999
  • Have amended to explicitly state who were aged between 19 and 25 by the time the show aired and avoid original research.
  • ref 15 is probably unnecessary as ref 16 goes into more specifics and is more reliable
  • I will remove if deemed as unreliable, but the premiere date has been contested before so I feel as if two references are important here.
  • In September, Sony Music released the corresponding debut album, Jump and Jive with Hi-5 → this article is about the group, so maybe "the group's debut album"
  • Fixed.
  • The group toured Sydney in their first year. → Right now this sentence could mean they toured around different places in Sydney. The source only refers to one show in Newcastle.
  • Have reworded to explicitly state The group performed at venues such as the Newcastle Civic Theatre in their first year..

Given the amount of comments (and sourcing issues) I found myself writing for just three paragraphs, I am probably going to find it hard to support promotion. I might suggest looking into The Wikipedia Library if you haven't already as you may have an easier time finding higher-quality sources using ProQuest, etc., especially for the earlier years. Heartfox (talk) 06:09, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Heartfox: While I appreciate the suggestion, I have just looked through 10 pages of ProQuest to double check, and I could only find 1 or 2 relevant articles - many are from 2010 and beyond, and mainly advertising material. I'm sure you can understand how there are little articles on this Australian band from the early 2000s available, and I believe I have found the best resources (including theses) available.
  • @Heartfox: Thanks for looking at the artcile. I would really appreciate your continued comments and feedback. I've gone to great lengths to work on this (five years researching, successful GA review, in-depth peer reviews, full copy-edit from GOCE and detailed FA reviews here) and I always put in the effort required. Others have supported the nomination, and you have picked up extra items that everyone else has missed (and many of them are easy fixes). I'm sure with your help the article can reach FA standard, and I love working with you. SatDis (talk) 07:43, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Source review by Ealdgyth

edit
As I understand it, Ealdgyth has left unstruck 1) https://researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au/id/eprint/85/2/02Whole.pdf and 2) http://web.archive.org/web/20151211022149/https://www120.secure.griffith.edu.au/rch/file/729e04d9-6c13-d33b-3f06-db209d5ba376/1/07Chapter6.pdf
On 1), as it does seem to be a doctoral thesis, I am looking at what it is used to source. Most instances of where it is used are double or triple cited, and are not statements that concern me as to needing higher quality sourcing. Except:
  • Article says: The series' creators based it on an underlying educational structure, citing Howard Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences primarily. They recognised that each child learns differently, so each group member targeted a different aspect of learning.
  • The source seems to say that a different program (Dora the Explorer) is "based on Gardner's multiple intelligences theory". When addressing Hi-5 specifically, the source uses the term "loosely analogous" wrt Gardner, and says that "Harris designed the program to represent the style and energy of a music video". It is not clear to me if the two instances (Dora the Explorer versus Hi-5) are confused, although I may be missing something in the source. Unless I am missing something, I am concerned we may be drawing too strong of a conclusion from this source.
  • Separately, the article later says, "The group's musical performances were fast-paced, designed in a way which would replicate the energy of contemporary music videos", which is too close paraphrasing of the source.
  • I am also concerned that this part of the source is based on personal correspondence with Harris, so one could wonder how accurately it is portrayed. All other instances of the use of Hynd seem OK, but that this examination revealed some close paraphrasing unfortunately indicates that a more indepth source review will be needed.
On 2) similarly, most of what it is citing does not raise eyebrows, or is double or triple cited. But on the one instance I want to check, the page range is much too broad for me find and verify the specific instances (the document is almost 20 pages long, and ctrl-f is not producing the desired content). Page numbers should be tightened for this source, and excerpted quotes to back the following article content would help me review check it here:
  • The creators saw the need for "life-affirming" television for rapidly maturing preschoolers and found most children learned from shows which incorporated movement and song.[5]
That's all for now. I have disabled web pings, but will see them when I check email, so please do ping me when you have finished resolving these. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:00, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have tightened page numbers for both thesis citations. I have done this by listing the thesis in a bibliography and citing individual pages. Please let me know if I need to make further changes, as I am eager to correct any mistakes. SatDis (talk) 06:01, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support by Jayfax

edit

@SatDis: Just some quick first-read comments.

  • Hi-5 were an Australian children's musical group, don't think there needs to be a comma here.
  • highest paid entertainment entities "entertainment entities"? Tell me if there's otherwise a subtle distinction being made here, but wouldn't it "entertainers". Could not find the word "entity" in the Business Weekly articles.
  • Changed to "group" as they were collective.
  • and that the following years spent with the group were her favourites favorites -> favorite
  • Robinson (then referred to as Delaney) exited from the group in February 2008 left would be better word than exit
  • the remaining original cast members had stated their intent to withdraw from the group. withdraw from -> leave
  • Park also stated she would be departing the group depart -> leaving
  • They did not receive the same critical reception as the original members the same (positive?) critical reception
  • Burgess and Maddren declared their departures in late 2012 declared their departures -> left the group
  • Datuk Jared Lim, Asiason's managing director, conveyed plans to expand Hi-5 throughout Southeast Asia conveyed -> described
  • Will have another read later. JAYFAX (talk) 12:45, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @JAYFAX: Thanks for the comments. Just a quick note, one of my strongest suggestions from another reviewer was not to use "leave/left the group" so much as it became repetitive. Not sure if going back to simple terms is better or not? I have fixed all of the other suggestions. SatDis (talk) 05:06, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks @JAYFAX: I understand the concept; though I don't think "exited", "withdraw" or "departure" are unclear or distract the reader, as the policy suggests. Did you have any further comments? SatDis (talk) 15:17, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @SatDis: There is another instance of entertainment entities I perhaps should've mentioned in the "Reception section.
  • I don't intend to do an informal source review, and rereading the article I'm overall quite happy with it. The level on detail is on par with The Wiggles, something I read once described "like a history of a small country". Will indicate support after this fix. JAYFAX (talk) 17:28, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support by Cas Liber

edit
  • Harris said Hi-5 was primarily a television series, but the music itself stood alone. - "stood alone" is odd - I get what you mean but odd wording
  • Harris was inspired develop a show with universal appeal and accessible themes such as family and animals. - I'd say "broad" rather than "universal" here (nothing has universal appeal)
  • A serious motorcycle accident in June 2007 left Harding unable to keep up with the high energy of Hi-5 - "high" unnecessary here. "pace" may be better than "energy" too.

Otherwise looks in good shape. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:58, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Casliber: Thanks for the comments, I have addressed those suggestions. SatDis (talk) 02:20, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by ImaginesTigers

edit

Comments moved to Talk. — ImaginesTigers (talk) 21:16, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Done. My question now, is that should the "Musical style" section be merged into the "History", as it is quite small? The last line (quote from Wilcher) could move into "Reception." SatDis (talk) 03:59, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • You could merge Musical style and Educational theory into a single subheading called "Musical style"? — ImaginesTigers (talk)
  • @ImaginesTigers: Just a quick question before I tackle the comments - what do you mean by writing out the Awards in full? As in expanding "ARIA" to "Australian Recording Industry Association"? Or as in making sure "Best Children's Album" is on every row? Thanks. SatDis (talk) 12:19, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Like League of Legends#Accolades; de-table-ify it. I can't see anything in the Manual of Style, though, so don't worry about it.
  • Also, if I remove the TV awards from this section, does that mean remove them from the prose? It is kind of hand in hand information about the group and the TV show. That would mean a lot of other information on the page would become irrelevant as well. SatDis (talk) 12:19, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This sounds like a question outside the scope of this FA, right? The articles need to have their own focus, but I think overlap is probably fine, you're right. Similar to this question, with League of Legends, I include awards won by the game for esports events. That's pretty similar. Don't worry about this one either.
  • Noted. In saying that, I have directed the focus of this article to the group specifically and not the TV show, as best as possible. They do link, and in previous nominations, it was agreed that the group themselves are receiving the awards for their work on the TV show. SatDis (talk) 03:59, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'd agree with Australian group, personally, but vocal ensemble probably does fit better. Either would be fine (band is definitely not right, though!).
That is a very good question. You'll have to ping the co-ords or post on WT:FAC, because I genuinely don't know. Sorry for the delay. — ImaginesTigers (talk) 19:43, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have posted on WT:FAC and the reply was, to wait until after this nomination is closed. Editors, please note that I will be changing the title to Hi-5 (Australian group) after this nomination is closed.SatDis (talk) 03:59, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've tagged my replies with my sig. Article is looking decent overall; give me a ping when you've replied. — ImaginesTigers (talk)

Support. — ImaginesTigers (talk) 01:36, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image Review

edit
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Hi-5_(Australian_band)/archive4&oldid=1002550398"