Jump to content

Talk:Words (Piri & Tommy song)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: rejected by reviewer, closed by BlueMoonset talk 14:52, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Article has been redirected to Froge.mp3 per AfD closure; without an article, this nomination is closed as unsuccessful.

(
)

Moved to mainspace by Launchballer (talk). Self-nominated at 13:58, 8 June 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Words (Piri & Tommy song); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: No - I have a question for others -- is it OR if though true, it is not commented on by an RS (though individually the facts synthesized are each supported by an RS) .. I would hope this is not a problem.
  • Interesting: Yes

QPQ: Unknown
Overall: a) Perhaps someone else can opine - since as indicated in the first sentence of the article the song title is "stylised in lowercase," should WP not be doing the same in the title of the article and the references to the song within? b) I agree that Alt 1 is best, if it is not (see above) a synth problem.

Wikipedia uses WP:SENTENCECASE, although I'm with you, I think this should be at words (piri & tommy song). It's downright hypocritical that we entertain other stylisations such as spellings (Beachin rather than Beaching) but ignore capitalisation. See also User talk:Launchballer#Piri and Piri & Tommy stylisations. That lyric is actually commented on in the critical reception section, so can be used - although see also Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Piri & Tommy Villiers song hooks.--Launchballer 08:52, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure that's right, or at least without exceptions. See k.d. lang. But as I said -- perhaps someone else can opine. Best. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:7468:9C4F:BECE:5B21 (talk) 09:16, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Striking ALT1 per the now-archived Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Archive 193#Piri & Tommy Villiers song hooks discussion on using song lyrics as hooks for these Piri & Tommy hooks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:35, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looking for a second opinion on the review issue (synth?), since this has been sitting for over two months since the reviewer requested one, and also a general check of the nomination. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:09, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Launchballer: the lead says the song received "universal critical reception". What does that mean? Viriditas (talk) 10:43, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think I intended 'universally positive' reception, but having had the word 'universal' taken out of another Piri & Tommy lede, I've just replaced the word with positive.--Launchballer 10:50, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Launchballer: thanks. Can you check ref 1 (Spotify)? It is used ten times, but I can’t access it or the archived version. Let me know if you can, or if the link needs to be fixed. Viriditas (talk) 11:18, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Works fine for me. You'll need to scroll down quite far though (it's a discography, and she's released loads since).--Launchballer 11:23, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I’m on mobile at the moment. It says "Spotify can’t open this type of link on this device." I’m curious if that’s because it’s a regional-specific link (UK only?) or a desktop-only link, and if there’s a way to change that to a general link instead, or use a different source. Not a big deal, just something to consider. Viriditas (talk) 11:38, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect Spotify forces mobile users to use its app.--Launchballer 11:52, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am using the app. That’s the error message I get inside the app. Viriditas (talk) 12:01, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Very weird. It's working for me.--Launchballer 13:05, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It’s not that weird. Apps like Amazon and Spotify use regional restrictions. I was able to get into the Spotify discography another way, but I think there’s probably a better way to link to the discography in a way that doesn’t trigger the lock. I’m looking into it. Also continuing the process of verifying the rest of the article. Viriditas (talk) 21:37, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Following up with spot checks for OR and synthesis brought up by the original reviewer:
  • "The latter went viral on TikTok and Spotify, prompting EMI to sign the pair". I realize this must seem blue sky, but I don’t find EMI mentioned anywhere. Yes, it appears on the Spotify page, but the assertion that the label signed them after the viral hit doesn’t seem directly supported (I might have missed it, so excuse me if I did). I suspect that there are other sources that support this, and if so, please make this clear, paying attention to text-source integrity.
  • "the same day as Alesso and Zara Larsson's song of the same name". Needs a secondary source linking the two different songs, as we can’t make that observation. Shouldn’t be difficult to find.
  • "Higgo and Hamdi would later provide remixes of the Piri & Tommy song". Personally, I’m okay with this, as it links to the Spotify discography. But I think some editors are more conservative in their approach, and would ask that you use secondary sources to show the importance of the remix. Again, I don’t think this would be difficult to do.
  • "The song was intended by Villiers as a ‘Disclosure meets old school speed garage’ song. This is probably fine, but the source says that Tommy was talking about the beat specifically ("with the beat I was going for disclosure meets old school speed garage") not the song in general. Not a big deal, but I think it helps to keep it close to the meaning of the source.
    • Added sourcing for EMI; the source said 'major-label re-release', so I've added another source to say 'said label was EMI'. I've had to take out the Alesso line because there is no secondary source to say that; I literally found out about it by going through piri's Twitter (which I stand by, she regularly shares sources that have since fallen off Google) and finding this comment. I haven't been able to find a secondary source for either of the remixes, but I have reworded the Villiers bit to "Villiers' intended the song's beat as".--Launchballer 05:47, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Thanks. Is there any way you can use another source besides Spotify to support the same information? I'm not convinced we can use it. Viriditas (talk) 22:43, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's usable per WP:VENDOR: "inline citations may be allowed to e-commerce pages such as that of a book on a bookseller's page or an album on its streaming-music page, in order to verify such things as titles and running times". Possibly undue for prose though, and I have at least replaced that.--Launchballer 19:18, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The label re-released "Soft Spot" under the name "Piri & Tommy Villiers". Please use this source to support this statement instead of the one you have now.
  • and "Beachin" as Piri & Tommy. Please add this source to support this statement.
Added both.--Launchballer 21:41, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Looks like you just need an ALT3 and we are good to go. Viriditas (talk) 22:08, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not seeing what was wrong with ALT0 (although possibly it should say "during and about", like so: ALT3: ... that "Words" by Piri & Tommy was written during and about a rough patch in their relationship?), but let's go quirky. ALT4: ... that "Words" is "a condemning narrative"?--Launchballer 08:18, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing was wrong with ALT0, I just wanted to give you the last word and the option to expand the hook choices. Everything looks good, article checks out, refs check out, length is good, QPQ is good, neutrality and copyright look good. Nice work. Viriditas (talk) 09:59, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Rough patch" was in there unattributed, so I've reworded it. ALT5: ... that "Words" by Piri & Tommy was written during a challenging period in their relationship? Source: https://readdork.com/features/piri-and-tommy-july-2022/--Launchballer 10:59, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
. Ok, good to go. Viriditas (talk) 11:02, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

pulled per discussion at WT:DYK. Discussion should consider here. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 01:58, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How about:
Just doesn't feel great to be citing Promonews.tv as a source...but cited it is, many times across Wikipedia. After all, where else would we get detailed information about music videos? Cielquiparle (talk) 09:38, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Moved comment above from WP:DYKT, striking ALT5 as too similar to two recent hooks that already ran on DYK. Cielquiparle (talk) 04:33, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I honestly refuse to believe that promonews.tv gives due weight for anything – if it's in any way a reliable source, i'm gonna eat a nomination whole, wikitext and all. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 08:50, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Launchballer, I'm considering taking this article to AfD because I don't feel that any of the current sourcing goes in-depth on the actual song in a way NSONGS accepts. Before I do that, could you point me to the article's three best, and let me know if you find any extra sources that provide notability? theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 09:02, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've got to be honest and say I'm struggling; [3][4][5] are all either non-independent or not particularly in-depth. I mainly wrote this article because I thought that BBC Radio 1 making it its Hottest Record and Uproxx ranking it on its end of year list was an indicator of notability.--Launchballer 09:38, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Launchballer: Hmm, I'm not sure any of these would count as reliable sigcov, yeah. Listen, I'm gonna take this to AfD, because that's how the notability question gets resolved – and if you think you've cobbled together a case for notability at any point, i'm happy to reconsider. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 04:55, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Theleekycauldron: This has gone off to the great encyclopedia in the sky. I'm going to redirect Fumble (song) as well, because my justification for both was being awarded "Hottest Record" and that song is even more poorly sourced, but I think the others pass muster.--Launchballer 07:47, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A revision

[edit]

Launchballer pointed me to wp:sentencecase, in reverting me as reflected below. But I'm not sure how that applies to the single revision I made that was reverted, in which I was keeping the title not of the WP article - but of a Youtube video mentioned - pristinely accurate. https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Words_(Piri_%26_Tommy_song)&diff=prev&oldid=1161675060 2603:7000:2101:AA00:7468:9C4F:BECE:5B21 (talk) 09:05, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Words_(Piri_%26_Tommy_song)&oldid=1206077081"