This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Bends (song) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
The Bends (song) was a Music good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
This article is part of WikiProject Alternative music, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopedic coverage of articles relating to alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.Alternative musicWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative musicTemplate:WikiProject Alternative musicAlternative music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles
Is there any Irish magazine, newspaper or whatever that reviewed "The Bends" as a single apart from the reviews that were given to it as a title track on The Bends reviews? This is the first question. Second question: Does anyone know any other official Irish Singles Chart from a magazine that included "The Bends" in which it could be placed in the body of the article? Tamer Gunner (talk) 15:01, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Should Oxfordshire really be wikilinked since it is a county?
I wikilinked 2 Oxfordshire, one in the intro and second in the Writing section, I think it's enough
List experimental rock under genres here like you have in the body
Though this genre is from a reliable source, I do not feel "The Bends" is experimental enough to be added in the infobox
That does seem quite inconsistent if it is listed under genres in comp, so maybe just say it includes elements instead? --K. Peake06:45, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"and was originally titled "The Benz."" → "originally going under the title of "The Benz"."
Done, without adding "of"
"credited to all" → "while credited to all"
Done
Remove the comma after debut album
Done
""["The Bends"] is one" → ""['The Bends'] is one" per the rules on each double speech marks inside quotations
Done
"numerous times earlier." → "numerous times prior to release." and add the weird quote from one of the band members
Done
[7][8][9][10][11] is too many refs at the end of a sentence; you could add them all to a footnote, but I would suggest only keeping sources here confirming it was performed multiple times before release, rather than ones like Far Out Magazine that focus on specific performances
Done
"recorded a 4-track demo" → "recorded a four-track demo" per MOS:NUM
I think this word must be written like this as it a type of a demonstration.
Does [28] really work as a source for the song being hard rock since that genre is mentioned in the sentence before "The Bends"?
As the source mentioned, translated "The band hadn't completely abandoned hard rock as they did on the title track and 'Bones'", so, genre-wise, the title track is hard rock
Grunge should not be included as a genre when post-grunge is, as that is a sub-genre
I think the track is more post-grunge as the genre merges grunge with hard rock, while grunge is more hardcore, also grunge was dead in this era
The sentence feels like a run-on when it gets to the "which, despite achieving" part, so you should start a new sentence here with "Despite this achieving" or "Despite the song achieving", depending on the meaning of the source (I can't access it)
If you or someone else has a better way to simplify this long sentence, do it
I have already specified that you can split into a second sentence at the achieving part, furthermore when "it also caused them" is written in the new context this will read smoothly. --K. Peake07:02, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"Its artwork features" → "The accompanying artwork features"
Done
"and in Belgium by EMI Belgium in May 1996, included" → "while issued in Belgium by EMI Belgium in May 1996, including" with the pipe, also cite the single release instead because the current source provides none of this info
If the single release does not source the artwork part, then remove this info since it is not backed up currently
Remove wikilink on David Bowie
The first wikilink was for "Bowie pastiche", I put another wikilink in this section for the full name
Done for adding "the", but for the "own" words I can't find thing suitable in my head, so you can help with some ideas or adding directly if you can. Tamer Gunner (talk) 22:40, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For the second sentence of the review, try something like "Kleinedler appreciated the "seemingly self-pitying line", seeing it as not really self-pity but "what defines Radiohead"." --K. Peake09:31, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That looks a lot better and I added the word instead to smoothen it out, however you need to remember to sign off comments since the revision history shows many have relied on auto-signing by SineBot. --K. Peake16:58, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"in Chicago Illinois in June,[92] and" → "in Chicago, Illinois in June and" per overly obvious wikilink and move [92] solely to the end of the sentence
Done
Add a relevant img instead because no performance at the Centre Ball is mentioned
"(1995),[95] and the 2009 reissue" → "(1995) and the 2009 reissue", moving [95] solely to the end of the sentence
Done
"they performed it in their performance" → "the band performed it for their set"
Done
"on the 2009 reissue of The Bends "Special Collectors Edition" on DVD." → "on the 2009 DVD "Special Collectors Edition" reissue." per this already having been introduced
Done
"in the setlists of" → "on the setlists of"
Done
"1997 festival [[Eurockéennes|Les Eurockéennes de Belfort in France in July,[105] and" → "July festival Les Eurockéennes de Belfort in France and" moving [105] solely to the end of the sentence
Done
"(2003),[110] and In Rainbows" → "(2003) and In Rainbows" moving [110] solely to the end of the sentence
Done
"they performed it" → "they performed a rendition of it"
I have my doubts about ref 94's reliability because Rock Cellar Magazine says nothing apart from that it is a source for music news, rock & roll, and celebrities, so what makes this reliable?
On hold until all of the issues are fixed; there is a good amount of reliable sources but these aren't detrimental to the article, so I won't be quick failing. --K. Peake20:15, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Just a note to say that a number of these recommendations, such as changing "Radiohead/they" to "the band" and "The Bends" or "it" to "the song" appear to introduce a large amount of elegant variation, which is usually detrimental. See WP:ELEVAR for more information on that. Popcornfud (talk) 14:37, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Popcornfud I understand that this may appear to be a problem in some areas, but when you have used terms like "it", "they" or "the band" consecutively, it can become unclear what you are referring to, especially with the former term. --K. Peake20:29, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, since you ask: personally I feel the article is a bit overstuffed. I question if all the detail is necessary, I think the prose is overwrought in places, and I think there's an overabundance of citations. I think the whole thing could use a haircut. I also don't agree that many of the replacements of pronouns benefits clarity. But hey, I'm not the reviewer here. Popcornfud (talk) 20:40, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Popcornfud Some of the prose changes may be a bit repetitive and if you want to point out which specifically, I am more than willing to take a further look. Also, the detail thing is not a problem but reliable sources have to be used per guidelines otherwise GA status is not acheivable. --K. Peake17:06, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The use of pronouns doesn't seem repetitive to me - that's what pronouns are for - and the use of elegant variation is distracting. Again, see WP:ELEVAR.
And yeah, naturally, articles require reliable sources. I'm talking about when statements that only require one citation have two or three - ie WP:CITEOVERKILL. This bogs down prose and makes things harder to verify, not easier, because it's not clear what information is in what citation. Popcornfud (talk) 18:13, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Popcornfud I understand what you are getting at here; would you prefer if I had a look through this article with a different mindset and only pointed out missed issues of a high importance, or if you went over which changes were not implemented and I thought them through deeper? --K. Peake19:57, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Without wanting to sound pissy, it isn't important to me whether this article passes the GA review or not - GA/FA reviews aren't an area of interest for me. I'm just making some observations as someone who has worked on pretty much every Radiohead article extensively. I think you should just do what you think is best, and I'll continue to edit the article when I see areas for improvement, like I do any other article. Though if there is anything specifically you'd like my help or thoughts on, by all means ask. Popcornfud (talk) 11:43, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
✗ Fail honestly the prose and layout is too sloppy, plus there is still a reasonable amount of unreliable sources. I appreciate the effort you have put in to this article, but not every GA review passes. Best of my wishes! --K. Peake16:26, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again Popcornfud. I enjoyed listening to this interview. In my opinion, podcasts published by unreliable sources remain reliable as long as they are recorded for someone telling a story that he or she attended and had a role in. As this podcast interview published by Apple Podcasts, which is "an audio streaming service and media player application developed by Apple Inc." Also see this talk. If you'll be ok with the source, go ahead and use it as long as it's more useful for the article. Tamer Gunner (talk) 19:38, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On hold until all of the issues are fixed; there is a good amount of reliable sources but these aren't detrimental to the article, so I won't be quick failing. --K. Peake 20:15, 31 March 2022 (UTC)