Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/David Bowie/archive1

David Bowie[edit]

I'm nominating this article because it is comprehensive. The subject has also had a wide effect on pop culture and beyond. - Deathrocker 18:16, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: The intro needs to have more information in it and there aren't any references that I could find. RENTA^{FOR LET?} 18:34, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Object Agree with Rentastrawberry. The article needs references and the lead, at one sentence, should instead be 2-3 paragraphs which summarize Bowie's significance. As well, agree that references and inline citations are needed. Finally, many of the single sentence sections read more like a timeline and should be turned into prose. An example, see the section "2000 to today: Contemporary Bowie". This is essentially a collection of single sentence statements often broken down into years. Instead, this should be changed to prose, i.e. paragraph format. --Ataricodfish 18:59, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: This article reads like a magazine article, not an encyclopedia article. It has a breathless, fawning tone to it. There are numerous low-value links, e.g. lightning, Philadelphia, nadir. There is too much minutiae (e.g. he is reported to have called someone a ‘wanker’, he had made no plans for any performances during the year). The fact that he participated in producing ‘Transformer’ is mentioned twice.
Meanwhile, more info would be useful in some areas. No discussion is made of the business end of his music, only the production. He turned down a knighthood, why? As the other comments indicate, there is room for more useful references. —ogenstein 15:29, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]