Talk:Soundgarden

Anyone think this is ready (or close to ready) to GA standard. I have no idea what GA's even are here. Tezkag72 (talk) 04:46, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Soundgarden back together[change source]

The English Wikipedia considers Soundgarden back together as per Chris Cornell's announcement to that effect on January 1:

http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/index.php/2010/01/01/soundgarden-reunion-is-official-school-is-back-in-session-writes-chris-cornell/ Kansan (talk) 23:04, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not simple[change source]

Main faults:

Long, complex sentences
unsimple verb tenses
too long: full of side issues and excessive details
intro less well written than that of English wiki

Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:24, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Mac, I am going to work on this article with diligence. First thing, though. I immediately have a problem. Are you aware we also have an entire article on just the List of Soundgarden band members? And of course the Soundgarden discography. What would you propose to do with the list of band members article? It alone is 11,000 bytes. Meanwhile I have simplified the intro of this. Fylbecatulous talk 18:36, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I had seen the one on band members. I think both might be deleted on the grounds they are such close copies of the En versions. At any rate, it is usual for us to deal with band members in the general articles on bands. Discographies are usually pretty much copies of the En versions.

I think cutting down the verbiage this page has under 'history' would leave space to put in basic info about band members. There is a lot of gasbagging in the prose, which is typical of En wiki articles. Every paragraph will be a challenge... I'm glad to see you are interested. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:25, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Mac, okay, here is what I have done:

took your cue and used the English wiki version of the introduction and simplified it to replace what was in history
definately removed much excess and side issues; trimmed until it bled, especially tours and quotes. Only left mention of two details, I think: the founding of Sub Pop Records and the invasion of Nirvana (band) upsetting all of grunge. These I covered in shorter, brief form (feel they belong because they are both part of history of Seattle music scene and Soundgarden can't be extracted)
Vanished much content in List of Soundgarden band members and turned it back into a list format with a timeline with a simplified introduction and gallery (gallery could be removed...)
Placed some trimmed text into the individual members' articles, simplified. All are stubs, so no harm
Simplified all remaining text in this article. I have not paid much attention to verb tenses. Some sentences are still compound, but better. This is my usual writing style here, anyway :))
Barely updated Discography just to reflect reunion. That article is another headache entirely. Part of the difficulty here on Simple is we come, we go and take our passions with us. Articles require updates from time to time and we are the few. I have a difficult time remembering to look back at my creations...

So I have left your 'simplify' tag, because of your main faults one and two. I defer to your reading and deciding. It is still in my mind to update this. Thanks Fylbecatulous talk 16:07, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- The intro is very much better: well done! I have tweaked the early band history section to be less wordy. I have edited the first ref in that section to make it more readable, as an example. This is not a necessity, but I do it on science articles because their references are so alien and forbidding to readers at school level. I think this is the important article of the three, and the discography may stay as it is, since life is too short... Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:05, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

- - Mac, thank you...for your foresight ツ In gratitude and kind regards, Fylbecatulous talk 19:06, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]