Jump to content

Talk:Hunky Dory

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleHunky Dory is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Good topic starHunky Dory is part of the David Bowie studio albums series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 17, 2021.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 7, 2020Good article nomineeListed
August 16, 2020Peer reviewReviewed
October 7, 2020Featured article candidatePromoted
August 8, 2022Good topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article


[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Hunky Dory. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:19, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hunky Dory. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 22:48, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Genres

[edit]

Are there any sources for any of the genres currently given in the infobox? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:38, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Copy Edit Status Updates

[edit]

Place your responses below this disclaimer and table (after the hr code). Remember to sign your name at the end of all of your statements by typing in ~~~~; Do not edit the article as it will cause conflicts for me and the tools I am running on the page. I will reformat this discussion to keep everything neat and orderly and we will have a lot of discussions. Thank you GalendaliaChat Me Up 19:23, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Status Task Main Editor Comments Signature with Date & Time
 Done Reference Building Galendalia GalendaliaChat Me Up 19:31, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Template Buildout Galendalia GalendaliaChat Me Up 19:31, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Copyright Violations Galendalia GalendaliaChat Me Up 19:31, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Formatting Galendalia GalendaliaChat Me Up 19:31, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Spell Check Galendalia GalendaliaChat Me Up 21:55, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Grammar Check Galendalia GalendaliaChat Me Up 21:55, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Plagiarism Check Galendalia GalendaliaChat Me Up 21:55, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Redirect Check Galendalia 4 found GalendaliaChat Me Up 19:31, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Neutrility Check Galendalia GalendaliaChat Me Up 21:55, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done COI Checks Galendalia None apparent GalendaliaChat Me Up 19:31, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Dead Link Check Galendalia None found GalendaliaChat Me Up 19:31, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Infobox Photo Rights Galendalia Cleared GalendaliaChat Me Up 19:31, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Dablinks Galendalia 1 found Hunky Dory (disambiguation) GalendaliaChat Me Up 19:34, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Um, if we can't make any edits "as it will cause conflicts for you and the tools you are running on the page", how would we ever make any entry to the above table? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:34, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Did you see Template:EngvarB at the top of this article? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:18, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Martinevans123: - Hi, the CE does not take too long and once I am done edits can be made by any editor. This is done so that no one can undue undo changes or add changes to the article while I am doing the copy edit. When the banner disappears at the top of the article, then you know when the GOCE is done with their work. As a side note, I am almost done. Need about 5 more minutes. As for the template, it has all been converted British English, this does take time to do as it was a mix of American and British when I started. Thanks - GalendaliaChat Me Up 21:55, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I see. Thanks. I think you mean "undo". Martinevans123 (talk) 21:57, 3 May 2020 (UTC) - @Martinevans123: - fixed ;) GalendaliaChat Me Up 22:28, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE copyedit request part 2: Electric Boogaloo

[edit]
  • [...] and the musicians who would later become known as the Spiders from Mars – Mick Ronson, Trevor Bolder and Mick Woodmansey. Just to confirm (and using the album mentioned below), "the" isn't a hard, capitalised "T"?
  •  Done. Thanks for the MoS link.
  • Following the hard rock sound of its predecessor [...] What was its predecessor? The Man Who Sold the World?
  • Yes, its predecessor was TMWStW.
  •  Done. Added "previous album" before TMWStW for clarity.
  • Defries signed a contract with Chrysalis [...] Did Defries sign his own contract with Chrysalis or did he sign Bowie's?
  • He signed Bowie's. I realize now that I definitely did not make that clear.
  • checkmark Done by requester.
  • [...] including an attempt to sign American singer-songwriter Stevie Wonder after Wonder's contracted ended with Motown Records. Was he trying to sign Wonder with Chrysalis as well?
  • No so Defries wanted to become Stevie Wonder's new manager once Wonder's contract with Motown expired once he turned 21. However, Wonder decided to renegotiate his terms with Motown, with greater creative control, so Defries failed at that and turned his full attention to Bowie.
  • checkmark Done by requester.
  • [...] similarly parted ways with Bowie, primarily due to their disgruntlement with the artist on top of not being paid for their performances. Can we replace "disgruntlement" with "creative differences"?
  • Cann uses "disgruntled" so from my understanding, it wasn't as much "creative differences" but more of the fact that they were both irritated and annoyed. Could I use one of those?
  •  Done. I've left the term in as their feelings toward him seemed very specific, but I adjectivised the noun.
  • Bowie was sent on a promotional tour of America in February 1971, which gave him inspiration for his songwriting. Who sent him on the tour?
  • According to this edit, it was Mercury Records. Sandford says it was so I'll add that.
  • checkmark Done by requester.
  • However, he came to the conclusion that he could not do the project without Ronson, who was enthusiastic when Bowie contacted after not speaking for nine months. Already edited. Is it pertinent that Ronson was depressed?
  • Honestly not really. That's one of those instances where I was on a roll to the point I just didn't know when too much was too much. Thanks for changing it.
  •  Done. No worries, I've been in the zone before.
  • Also known as "Zowie", Bowie would tell David Wigg in 1973: "I got the name [Zowie] from a Batman comic". I'm thinking about removing this; how is this important to the creation of the album?
  • It's not. It's important on Duncan's page but definitely holds no relevant context to this album; "Kooks" doesn't even mention "Zowie".
  •  Done. Removed. This tidbit could be or is probably already in Duncan's article.
  • Aside from a cover of Chuck Berry's "Almost Grown" and Ron Davies' "It Ain't Easy", all of the songs they performed were originals written by Bowie. "It Ain't Easy" was to be recorded for Ziggy Stardust a year later. Boldly edited on my part, but may be a casualty of sentence rearrangement. Was it "It Ain't Easy" or "Almost Grown" that was recorded for the Ziggy Stardust album?
  • "It Ain't Easy". In fact, the recording of "Almost Grown" at that BBC session was the only documented time Bowie recorded that song; it appears on Bowie at the Beeb but on no studio album.
  •  Done.
  • [...] he was previously an engineer on Bowie's two previous albums, along with the Beatles' Magical Mystery Tour (1967) and the "White Album" (1968) at Abbey Road Studios, and George Harrison's All Things Must Pass (1970), which featured an acoustic sound that Scott borrowed for Hunky Dory. Did Scott borrow the "acoustic sound" from all mentioned albums or just the last one (Harrison)?
  • Just ATMP. Clarified that.
  • checkmark Done by requester.
  • He recalled in the Radio 2 documentary Golden Years and his autobiography Say Yes! that Bowie had to halt the sessions, telling the musicians off and to come back when they knew the music. Was he compelled to stop the sessions or did he feel like it?
  • According to Wakeman, he was compelled to.
  •  Done. Leaving as is.
  • However, this account has been disputed by other band members, including Bolder, who told Cann [...] First of many, but who's Cann? This is the first mention of Cann in the article.
  • A biographer. When expanding, I was doing different sections at different times and because I knew I'd be using the authors' names a lot I didn't know when to use their full name first so I planned on doing that later once everything was done. I apparently never did that so I caused some confusion :-P
  • checkmark Done by requester.
  • On 26 July, a seven-hour mixing session took place in order to compile a promotional album for Gem Productions. Who mixed?
  • Cann doesn't specify. I assume Scott but since Cann doesn't say I didn't want to assume.
  •  Done. Source unclear, fine as is.
  • O'Leary writes that it was recorded in early to mid-July. Who's O'Leary?
  • Same reasoning as above, one of those instances just forgot to go back.
  • checkmark Done by requester.
  • Spitz describes it as a piano-driven record and because of this [...] Who's Spitz?
  • I actually specified who he is in the background section.
  • trout Self-trout. I missed that.
  • Buckley writes that "strange fascination" is a phrase that "not only embodies a continued quest for the new and the bizarre [...] Who's Buckley?
  • Same as above.
  • checkmark Done by requester.
  • Wakeman revealed in a BBC interview in 2017 that Bowie played piano in the beginning section but he played for the rest of the track. What did he play for the rest of the track? Guitar?
  • No piano. Apparently there's been "confusion" regarding who played piano on "Oh! You Pretty Things" (something I don't think is a massive deal) and according to Wakeman, Bowie played piano at the start but he played piano for the rest.
  •  Done. I was initially confused by whom "he" was referring to. Used the verb "took over" to clarify that "he" is Wakeman and not "Bowie".
  • Pegg found this hard to believe, and also considers the cactus to be similar to the one found in Eliot's "The Hollow Men". This sentence needs to stick with one tense. I'm assuming Pegg is still alive so I'm leaning towards present, unless Pegg changed his mind about Bowie's claim about reading Eliot.
  • I sometimes have issues with tense, that's on me. I'll work on that.
  •  Done. Switched tense for you. :)
  • The song is noticeably more "lightweight" than the two tracks it is sequenced between, but, according to Pegg, ultimately carries a hint of [the album's] preoccupation with the compulsion to fictionalise life, as Bowie invites his son to 'stay in our lovers' story'". Editorial marks there originally. Where do the opening quotation marks go?
  • That's on me. I'll fix that.
  • checkmark Done by requester.
  • It was suggested by Bob Grace of Chrysalis [...] Grace was already introduced much higher up in the article, but it could be nice to remind readers of who he is affiliated with. (stylistic choice)
  • Yeah that's why I didn't just say "Grace" because he hadn't been discussed in multiple sections.
  •  Done. Left as is.
  • [...] who got the idea from an Esher pub landlord and formerly of the Royal Air Force. Who was formerly from the RAF? The landlord or Grace?
  • The landlord. Not sure if that info is really relevant tbh.
  •  Done. Removed the RAF mention.
  • RCA did not promote the album much due to its unusual album cover, described by Pegg as a fait accompli, and a warning that Bowie would be changing his image for his next album. Boldly edited. Were they warned that Bowie would be changing his image, and if so, by who?
  • Yes so by the time Hunky Dory was released, Bowie had already planned the Ziggy character and the sessions for Ziggy Stardust were underway, hacing started in November. Cann & Pegg don't specify who specifically informed RCA of this but due to this, they didn't know how to market HD, so it was initally a commercial failure.
  •  Done Source does not say, so no extra information added or expected. Rearranged sentence to be less awkward.
  • However, Doggett argues that this explanation is invalid because there is nothing in the song that supports this. What is "this"? Bowie's assertion?
  • Yes, Doggett doesn't agree with Bowie's claim here. It could be possible that Bowie didn't know what he was saying because during this time he was so coked out he had no idea what he was doing; for the rest of his life never remembered recording Station to Station. But as it stands, do you think I need this sentence or should I just remove it?
  •  Done. Replaced "this" with "Bowie's claim".
  • The chorus sees Bowie mincing his "satin and tat" as a nod to Lindsay Kemp. There must be a better verb than "sees" here. Does "sings about" work?
  • Yeah I've done that before in other articles (used "sees" when describing an inanimate thing). I'll reword this as I'm pretty sure that's too close to Pegg's words. I also think I could add more info on "Queen Bitch" as it feels a little light compared to the other tracks.
  •  Done. I've changed the verb to "sings about" and "nod" to "reference".
  • Buckley further said: "Its almost easy-listening status and conventional musical sensibility has detracted from the fact that, lyrically, this record lays down the blueprint for Bowie's future career". Emphasis added. Is this error originally in the quoted text?
  • So this quote is something that irks me a lot. It's sourced by the 2000 edition; I own the 2005 edition of Strange Fascination and I for the life of me have not been able to find this quote in the 2005 edition. It must have been removed for the revised edition, most likely to make room to discuss Heathens and Reality. So, I sadly can't answer your question. I really want to remove this sentence because I can't verify it but in the context of the album's legacy, it's very important. I still haven't reformated the ref which surely showcases my hesistance in including it but if you think it should be kept I'll reformat the ref.
  •  Pending. I ask only because I just need to know whether it needs a {{Sic}} tag after it. I have no doubt it is important. So you recalled it by memory?
  • The album was co-produced by Bowie and Ken Scott who, before producing, was an engineer for the Beatles and Bowie's previous two albums. Is the additional information necessary in the lede? Scott has an article on himself and him being an engineer isn't central to this album we're talking about.
  • I primarily added that info in the lead just to give some small background on who he was. It's probably not necessary to mention Scott's status as a Beatles engineer but I think the fact that he was the engineer for Space Oddity and TMWStW is important as it shows that Scott wasn't an outsider.
  •  Partly done. I've omitted the mention of the Beatles and left in the mention of Scott working on Bowie's previous two albums. Does that work?
  •  Done without further input from requester.
  • Yes it does work.
  • Hunky Dory marked a move towards art pop styles. Emphasis added. Did it influence other contemporary albums to do the same or is it just in terms of Bowie?
  • Just in terms of Bowie. Even though he had only released a bunch of singles and three albums (one that most don't count), Hunky Dory was his first record that was pure pop. Space Oddity was folk rock and TMWStW was hard rock so this was very different from the other ones. You can also say that "Queen Bitch" is glam rock, which no doubt was the prelude to Ziggy and Aladdin Sane.
  •  Partly done. You used the word "styles" after "art pop", and I removed it so that only influencing Bowie was clearer. Is it still correct to refer to "art pop" as a general concept, as in "Hunky Dory shifted Bowie's style towards art pop"?
  •  Done without further input from requester.
  • Yeah it's fine. I might change it later when I nominate it for GAN and possibly FAC but we'll see.
  • Upon release, the album received very positive reviews from multiple British and American publications but failed to chart [...] Any charts in particular?
  • Mainly just the UK but that also applies to everywhere. It didn't chart at all until the breakthrough of Ziggy. Should I just say "in the UK"?
  •  Partly done. I've added the word "anywhere". What do you think?
  •  Done without further input from requester.
  • Eh idk if I like "anywhere". I might just keep it as "failed to chart" as to me that gets the point across that it was anywhere.
  • checkmark Done by requester. Removed "anywhere".
  • Bowie was introduced by Grace to a band known as Chameleon. He gave them his future Ziggy Stardust track "Star", which they recorded their own unreleased version of. I think the intent is that Grace introduced Bowie to Chameleon. Bowie gave them the track. Is Grace important here? It sounds like this phrase would still work without mentioning Grace.
  • It probably would still work tbh.
* Partly done. I removed the mention of Grace, but I decided to edit what they did with "Star" so that the sentence doesn't end with "of". Would "cover" describe their version accurately, as in "He gave them his future Ziggy Stardust track "Star", from which Chameleon recorded their own unreleased cover"?
  •  Done without further input from requester.
  • Yes that works.
  • "Kooks" was written as a tribute for Bowie's son Duncan Zowie Haywood Jones, within days of his birth on 30 May 1971. Which one happened on May 30th? His son being born or the song being written?
  • Duncan was born on 30 May. Cann writes that Bowie had already been writing "Kooks" at this point for about a year and the birth of Duncan completed it. However, Pegg only says it was written "within days" after Duncan was born, hence it being performed as early as 3 June. Should I add Cann's thought's to specify?
  •  Partly done. How's this look instead: "A few days after Bowie's son Duncan Zowie Haywood Jones was born on 30 May 1971, Bowie completed "Kooks" and dedicated it to him"?
  •  Done without further input from requester.
  • So, "Quicksand" was Bowie's plea to search within himself to be shown the way. This is hopefully a direct quote of Wilson's that wasn't wrapped in quotation marks or it'd be considered original research.
  • This is definitely embarrassing. Doggett uses Colin Wilson's ideas as a means of tying together the concepts presented in "Quicksand". He does that in long sentences that I didn't want to excessively quote so I tried my best at paraphrasing but I guess that didn't work out. Do you want me to quote Doggett directly here so you can see what I mean and from there determine a better way of wording it?
  •  Partly done. I combined the sentence in question with the one before it and wrapped Doggett's conclusion in quotation marks while attributing it to him. How's it look?
  •  Done without further input from requester.
  • Looks good.
  • Upon his refusal to supports political protests of the Vietnam War and America in the time of Nixon [...] Whose refusal? Dylan?
  • Yeah Dylan. Do you think I give too much info for "Song for Bob Dylan"? When researching, I tried to give as much info as I felt was needed to give the reader the full picture but if you think it's too much I can trim some stuff.
  •  Partly done It depends on how the information shapes the song "Song for Bob Dylan". Dylan's influence on Bowie's Space Oddity album isn't relevant to the song, so I think that can be removed (leaving it tentatively for now). I opened up a previous sentence with a colon so that it introduces the idea that the following information is background. I've done a little bit of editing to make the sentence sound nicer; just to be sure, the politicals protests were against the Vietnam War, right?
  •  Done without further input from requester. Removed the mention of Space Oddity.
  • Yeah that's for the best.
  • Many reviewers have found a homosexual vibe to the track [...] "Homosexual" could probably be replaced with "homoerotic". Why is the word linked?
  • No idea I'll remove it. Homoerotic could work
  •  Partly done. Rewrote the first clause of the sentence as "Many reviewers have perceived the track to have homoerotic undertones". Does that work?
  •  Done without further input from requester.
  • Yes that works, definitely better wording.
  • He also uses the word "chameleon" [...] Bowie used this word to describe himself?
  • No he uses the word "chameleon" in the lyrics. Due to his constant changing of appearances and musical genres throughout his career, music critics came to describe him as a "chameleon".
  •  Partly done. I am assuming that he uses "chameleon" often enough in his songs that critics latched onto it to describe his constant changes.
  •  Done without further input from requester.
  • No this is the only track where Bowie explicitly says the word chameleon (to my knowledge) and in the context of "The Bewlay Brothers" it's not describing himself. Critics called him a chameleon because of his constant changing of appearances. An example of what I mean is this photo here. With almost every album he made, he changed his appearance and since "chameleons" blend in with the environment, critics have pointed out that he's one of the only major artists to change his look constantly. So, critics have dubbed him "the chameleon of rock".
  • checkmark Done by requester.
  • They contain lyrics that are influenced by the work of occultist Aleister Crowley and philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche. Is it important to note that the lyrics were influenced specifically by the works or just the people themselves? I see it go into detail further down the article, but I'm not sure if it's necessary for the lede.
  • Although it would probably be better to say works rather than work, I mentioned this in the lead just to give some insight as to what the lyrics were about. The lyrics on HD are much less common throughout than say Aladdin Sane, which was all about the sex and drugs Bowie experienced in America. Now, since Crowley and Nietzsche's works are mainly prevalent on "Quicksand", it might be better to say something else? The most notable I can think of would be "Changes", as the lyrics of that song are essentially the theme of Bowie's entire discography. I already mention the tribute songs in the lead so I'm not really sure what else to say.
  •  Partly done. I've specified the influences being attributed to one track, but I'm tentative about leaving it in the lead because it seems to be WP:UNDUE weight.
  • Yeah I don't like the attention "Quicksand" is given. Also, "Oh! You Pretty Things" is influenced by Crowley and Nietzsche as well. I just changed it to "Some of the songs". Might add a bit about "Changes".
  • checkmark Done by requester.
  • According to Andy Greene of Rolling Stone, the tour opened his eyes to new genres he had never explored before. Is everything past the comma a direct quote? As it stands it currently doesn't mesh with the Wikipedia tone as well as it could.
  • It's actually poor paraphrasing on my part of this quote: "The whole Hunky Dory album reflected my newfound enthusiasm for this new continent that had been opened up to me." I'll work on rewording.
  •  Pending. I'll come back to this in a future pass.
  • I removed that bit, as I didn't realize it's already stated in the quote box. Changed to: "In February 1971, Bowie was sent on a promotional tour of America by Mercury Records. After being influenced by diverse musical genres, he was inspired to write three tribute songs for three iconic American artists..." That better?
  • checkmark Done by requester. Works for me!
  • Haddon Hall, however, gave him more of a sense of comfort and permanence, something he had not felt before when composing. Same question as above.
  • Again, poor paraphrasing on my part. This time it's closer to the words Spitz uses but again, I'll make sure to reword that.
  •  Pending. I'll come back to this in a future pass.
  • Changed to: " Haddon Hall, however, was more comforting and less cluttered. As a result, he composed over three dozen songs there, many of which would..." That better?
  •  Done. Opened up the sentence before "Haddon Hall" with a semicolon so that the attribution carries over.
  • Bowie returned to the studio in May 1971 to begin work on his next album. To the studio as a general concept or to one studio in particular?
  • In this wording more of a general concept. I'll see if Cann and/or Pegg specified which studio it was because it definitely wasn't Trident (might have been Radio Luxembourg).
  •  Pending. Waiting on requester to see if a more specific studio can be located.
  • So Pegg doesn't say but according to Cann, Bowie grouped with Pritchett, Cox and Hill at Haddon Hall. But, a few days later, he went to Radio Luxembourg Studios to record demos (but with two new guys) so what to do you think I should say in the context of the sentence currently present? In the context of how I worded it and what Cann says, I think it should be Radio Luxembourg but I'll let you decide.
  •  Done. Still a little ambiguous for my tastes; replaced "the studio" with "studio work" and rewrote the sentence around that.
  • Although Bowie's backing trio were referred to as "members of a group called Ronno", the session was the first performance with the trio who later renamed themselves as the Spiders from Mars and recorded with him for the next three years. Boldly edited, forgot about this when gathering questions. Swapped this around a bit. How does it look to you?
  • Yes it looks good. Sorry I never responded to this one.
  •  Done.
  • [...] it offers more of an inviting and warmer feel, especially when compared to Space Oddity and The Man Who Sold the World. Direct quote? Doesn't fit the Wikipedia tone as well as it could be.
  • Most likely is, just another case of bad paraphrasing. I'm still working on improving my writing style.
  •  Pending. Will come back to this later. S'all good.
  • Changed to: "Spitz describes it as a piano-driven record that incites a warmer feel compared to its two predecessors." That better?
  • checkmark Done by requester. Looks good!
  • According to Pegg, "Quicksand" was inspired by Bowie's trip to America in February 1971,[73] but Doggett states that the song was written about a lack of inspiration and as a means of accessing it. Emphasis in original. Is the emphasis necessary, and if so, could it go on different words like "lack"?
  • Doggett actually emphasizes the words "about" and "accessing". I also thought the word "lack" should have been emphasized instead but I kept it as he wrote it.
  •  Partly done. Boldly added quotation marks. Please change if they're in the wrong position.
  • Was placed before "was". Fixed that.
  • checkmark Done by requester.
  • By 1970, Dylan was the spokesman of a generation. Missed this on my first run. Who said that?
  • It wasn't Pegg nor Doggett. I couldn't find anything saying that on Dylan's own page so just removed it.
  • checkmark Done by requester.
  • However, in a 1976 interview with Melody Maker [...] Boldly edited. I'm assuming that it was done in an interview format.
  • Should I reword?
  •  Remark: It depends on if the quote that Melody Maker was gathered from an interview. I'm just assuming that the newspaper had a journalist sit down with Bowie and interview him as opposed to doing something like eavesdropping.
  • checkmark Done by requester.


Looking forward to your responses! —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:25, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Tenryuu Thanks for the ce and comments. I've responded to everything and will continue working on the article when I can, as after today, I'm going to be a lot more busy irl. Thanks again. :-) – zmbro (talk) 01:55, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Zmbro: I've addressed all your replies; some of them require further input on your part. It turns out I actually forgot two questions in my first pass; I have marked them with so if you could answer those that would be great! Hope to hear from you again soon! —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 08:19, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zmbro, I went ahead with some of the unresolved items. I'll hang around until 00:00 (UTC) tomorrow before I consider the copyedit request complete. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:14, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tenryuu Thanks for the input. Very sorry I haven't been able to do things quicker, things irl have been a bit hectic the past few days. I won't be able to delve into anything until around 00:00 UTC so would you be able to wait til tomorrow to mark it as done? Once I'm available I promise I'll take care of everything and respond to the stuff marked "done without input from the requested". Thanks again for the help and sorry for the slow responses. – zmbro (talk) 17:00, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Tenryuu I believe I have taken care of everything. I've requested your input on a few things. Thanks again! :-) – zmbro (talk) 00:50, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Zmbro: Thanks! I'm going to give it one final lookover before considering the request complete. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:07, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, with that last lookover, I consider the request complete. See you around Zmbro! —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:35, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Hunky Dory/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ian Rose (talk · contribs) 13:00, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Not actually one of my fave Bowie albums overall but its importance to his career is pretty obvious so I can hardly resist -- give me a few days to read, tweak and review this greatly expanded article. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:00, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for taking it on! Yeah it wasn't one of my favs when I started expansion but as I added more and more it grew on me a lot and now it's one of my favorite albums period. After this I'm planning on doing a peer review then taking it to FAC. Thanks again for your help! :-) – zmbro (talk) 14:29, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ian Rose Quick side note: Thanks for trimming down the song info. I had worried that I was being too detailed, especially regarding "Changes". I had primarily taken the info from its song page that I expanded a while ago and was just one of those instances where I was so on a roll that I didn't know when enough was enough. Trim as much as you think is necessary. I thought about adding a little more info on "Queen Bitch" but if you don't think it's necessary I won't. I'd love to know your thoughts. – zmbro (talk) 23:52, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ian Rose Status on this? – zmbro (talk) 16:21, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, after the prose pass I have some comments to add that I've been compiling off-wiki, as well as the sourcing review, so will be another few days possibly. Cheers, 22:20, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Review

[edit]
Well written

Obviously I've copyedited so generally happy with the prose; one point:

  • We mention Ronson and Woodmansey leaving primarily because they were disgruntled with him on top of not being paid for their performances -- aside from being a bit awkward grammatically, I think this needs clarification: why disgruntled apart from not being paid, and for what were they not paid, the MWSTW sessions, live performances, or what?
  • Cann doesn't specify this. All Cann says is: "Mick Ronson and Woody Woodmansey are also disgruntled with David and in particular the lack of money (they have never been offered a wage) [the book is written in present tense]. Pegg doesn't talk about it at all so based on that I assume it means they weren't paid for The Man Who Sold the World and they, like Tony Visconti, didn't like Bowie's dismissive attitude during those sessions. What do you think it should be changed to?
  • Well first of all re-using the term "disgruntled" is paraphrasing too closely. I would change the sentence to something like Mick Ronson and Woody Woodmansey, who played guitar and drums respectively on The Man Who Sold the World, and had never been offered steady pay for their performances, also departed. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:01, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry but I don't think this edit is a net improvement. I appreciate you considering how to reduce quotes but this might be trying too hard. IMO substituting Hunky Dory features songs characterised by commentators as pop. Numerous styles are also present, including art pop, glam rock, folk, as well as country. in place of Michael Gallucci of Ultimate Classic Rock notes that it is Bowie's first album to include "a mix of pop, glam, art and folk wrapped in an ambisexual pose that would come to define the artist." is substituting a laundry list for a good punchy quote. I don't think a new set of quote fragments (Biographer Christopher Sandford states that the songs have a "lush ambiance" to them that give them an "easy-listening" quality) adds much, and changing "a kaleidoscopic array of pop styles, tied together only by Bowie's sense of vision: a sweeping, cinematic mélange of high and low art, ambiguous sexuality, kitsch, and class" to the various styles tie together only by Bowie's sense of vision: "a sweeping, cinematic mélange of high and low art, ambiguous sexuality, kitsch, and class" doesn't include such a high degree of good paraphrasing that it beats the previous version. I'd recommend that you go back to the original and don't try rewriting things much to reduce the quotes at this stage. What I was trying to say before is that when you get to PR and FAC, that might be suggested, but I wouldn't be second-guessing it, just be prepared for it. Let's get through GAN, then you can throw it at PR and see what several people (perhaps including me again) think of it, and if they suggest rewrites then do it before FAC. IMO you have a good solid article here and I wouldn't rewrite it except to specific reviewers' suggestions (mine now in GAN, and others' at PR and then, finally, at FAC). Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:54, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Reverted back to versions before those strings of edits. – zmbro (talk) 14:01, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Verifiable with no original research
  • Formatting-wise, the Sources sections could use some tidying, particularly before a run at FAC: Pegg could be linked, and there might be other notable authors; some of the books lack publishing locations and in some cases where present the location is just the country, e.g. "UK", when it should be city. The Buckley books are a good template for how the refs should be formatted.
    • I've taken care of a few of these. Sadly, Cann doesn't state a location. However, according to this website, the publisher, Adelita Ltd., is stationed in Croyden, Surrey. Should I put that as the location? – zmbro (talk) 20:20, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reliability-wise, the works under the Sources section look okay and some of course, like Pegg, are no-brainers. I'll check on reliability of other works in the References section as I run a spotcheck for accurate use of the refs and avoidance of close paraphrasing (below):
    • FN7: Not sure that Influenced by diverse musical genres is supported, the article seems to just mention folkie singer-songwriters like James Taylor and Cat Stevens. Also the Velvet Underground are not specifically mentioned in the source, just Lou Reed. I daresay you could find another source that helped support the text as is, but the current one doesn't seem to entirely.
  • Cann took care of VU but not the other thing. I can't find anything supporting it as I must have thought Greene said it. Just removed the Influenced by diverse musical genres part. – zmbro (talk) 19:42, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • FN24: Accurate use of source but a bit too closely paraphrased I think -- found it quicker to tweak myself.
    • FN39: Jim Butler in Produce Business Today doesn't seem a very authoritative source for Bowie song genres/styles, and I couldn't see the term "art pop" in Doggett either.
    • Yeah when I was expanding the article for "Changes" I saw that it was sourced and I thought well that's dumb and unreliable so I removed it but then went back and found that it's somehow the ONLY source I've found that has stated the genre as "art pop". Even Pegg and O'Leary sometimes don't go into specific genres that much, which is annoying. – zmbro (talk) 14:26, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • If Produce Business Today is the only source that says art pop then I think we have an issue -- personally I find it surprising as art pop seems a logical categorisation to me but my opinion doesn't carry any weight and I don't think Produce Business Today's does much either. I notice AllMusic puts "pop/rock" at the top, do Doggett, Pegg and Buckley, to name a few, offer succinct opinion on the genre? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:07, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nope they don't. Stating the genre for one song will not make or break the page so I ditched it. Saying it's built off a piano riff is just fine imo. – zmbro (talk) 19:47, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • FN47: Article reads it was the first track on Hunky Dory, the first time his audience had heard of him since The Man Who Sold the World, and his previous hard rock and metallic sound was not present; source reads: it was the first song on Hunky Dory, the first his audience had heard of him since The Man Who Sold the World, and where was the doom-racked rocker and his metallic power trio? -- way way too close.
    • Yeah, I think repeating "metallic", which is a distinctive term, is the issue and frankly I don't think we need it -- I suggest leave it at "the hard rock sound" or, if you like, "the heavy metal sound", which I think the source supports (I expect some of the other sources explicitly use the term). Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:24, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • FN50: No issues.
    • FN65: The word "cryptically" is straight from Pegg; better to leave such adjectives out of the our article than copy them direct.
    • I'm going to stop there for now because I'm finding too many issues with the referencing and this is only based on what I can easily access online -- there might be other instances of close paraphrasing or direct copying up to this point that I haven't found because I don't have the sources at hand. I think you need to go through the article top to toe looking for the sort of things I've noted above. Again, not suggesting complete rewrites, just putting things into your own words more, or eliminating terms you can't easily paraphrase (e.g. losing "cryptically" doesn't hurt the article) or perhaps even extending the odd quote if you feel the point is vital. TBH it might be better to close this review while you do that and then we redo but I don't mind leaving it open since I've taken things at my own pace as well... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:26, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Just so we don't have to drag this on further, I'll do exactly that sometime tomorrow, especially sentences that aren't direct quotes, as I suspect I did not paraphrase that well, especially in the song section. Thanks for the input, I'm still learning :-) – zmbro (talk) 14:26, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • I found one sentence that I have no idea how to reword. Source writes: "The front cover image was a close-up of Bowie living out his Bacall/Garbo fantasies, gazing wistfully into space as he pushes the flowing locks back from his forehead." Article reads: "The final image is a close-up of Bowie looking up into space as he pushes his hair back from his forehead." This was the best I could come up with – how do you think I should handle this? – zmbro (talk) 19:24, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hi, particularly given the image is in the article, I'd say you should simplify with something like "The final image is a close-up of Bowie looking past the camera while he pulls back his hair." Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:10, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Checking other sources used...
      • FN83: I don't know Far Out magazine and its editorial policy, etc, didn't seem evident from checking the website -- can you point me somewhere that confirms it's staffed by professionals and thus counts as a reliable course?
  • An editor over there said that they couldn't find anything that confirms its professional so tonight I'll remove all the info from them. Although I know for a fact a BBC review I cite mentions how "Queen Bitch" was a precursor to Ziggy so I'll be sure to include that. – zmbro (talk) 19:20, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Broad in its coverage

I think the article probably has too many incidental details that more properly belong in the song articles or could be done away with altogether, for instance:

  • The piano Wakeman played on the album was the same 1898 Bechstein used by Paul McCartney for the Beatles' 1968 song "Hey Jude" and many of Elton John and Harry Nilsson's early records, and would later be used by the English rock band Queen for their 1975 song "Bohemian Rhapsody".
  • I actually think this is a nice fact that could be interesting to readers, as the piano Wakeman used did have some historical importance. Being used on "Hey Jude" would already be enough to signify cultural status but to me the fact that it's used on all of Hunky Dory (the album that is retrospectively described as the turning point in creativity for Bowie) and later "Bohemian Rhapsody" really indicate that it's special. If it was on one song and not the whole album I could understand but since it's the entire album I think it's important. But that's just me.
  • Ronson guided the recording of "Life on Mars?", counting in each take and overdubbed his guitar, strings, Mellotron and Bowie's vocal.
  • Removed
  • Rose would decades later question Bowie's choice to copy his arrangement, saying "I mean couldn't you have done your own treatment of it?"
  • Removed
  • Removed

If you take to peer review or FAC you might also find concerns re. the number and length of quotes. I don't find this a barrier to GA but something to consider. My criteria for quotes are that they should be particularly pithy/insightful, or by someone notable/authoritative, or ideally both -- otherwise best try to paraphrase (but not closely)!

Yeah as I have stated before I figured I went into too much detail with some stuff. I haven't properly written an album article before (mainly just lists and song articles); Bowie is also one of those artists that many biographers (particularly Pegg and O'Leary) that have info for every track he ever recorded so I just didn't know when enough was enough. I do plan to take it to PR after this, especially if you, as an FAC coordinator, think that's what I should do first. :-) – zmbro (talk) 17:35, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral/Stable

No concerns here.

Illustrated

Images appear to be appropriately licensed but I think we have too many of them, leading to sandwiching (at least on my pretty standard laptop screen):

  • Strongly suggest losing the one of Trident, and moving the Wakeoman one to that position -- this also means Wakeman "looks into" the article as opposed to "out" of it as now.
  • Done.
  • I understand the attraction of illustrating all three of the tribute/parody songs with their subjects/inspiration but again I think too much. Certainly keep the VU shot as they're the least iconic pictorially, but I think we should lose Dylan and possibly Warhol too.
  • Removed Dylan as I see what you mean. I think I wanna keep Warhol so the first half of the side-two section doesn't feel "empty" (partially why I added the "Changes" audio sample to the top awhile back).

Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:01, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ian Rose I believe I have taken care of everything. Thanks again for reviewing! :-) – zmbro (talk) 17:47, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ian Rose I worked on rewording earlier this week and I think it's in a much better spot. Do you think anything else needs to be done? I know there are still a few books that need locations and maybe some more rewording but other than that do you think it's about time we get this over with? (Been almost a month now) I have a ton of time this weekend to work on stuff since it's a holiday here in the US so I'm willing to push through any more edits. Thanks again! – zmbro (talk) 23:52, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Zmbro, I should be able to make a further spotcheck this weekend so we can try and wrap up. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:48, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for the changes -- I copyedited a bit, and next will do another round of spotchecks to hopefully finish up. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:24, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ian Rose Alright so I think everything should be taken care of. We should be good now but if anything else needs to be done just let me know. :-) – zmbro (talk) 00:42, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Tks Zmbro, as a last thing I ran the copyvio detector and the top three results consisted almost entirely of direct quotes you'd used (and cited) so I don't think there's any reason not to pass this as GA now -- nice work. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:22, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ian Rose Thanks so much for reviewing! Hope to hear from you again over at FAC in the near future. :-) – zmbro (talk) 13:50, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hunky_Dory&oldid=1211205403"