Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/All-American Bitch/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 14 December 2024 [1].

All-American Bitch

[edit]
Nominator(s): NØ 06:43, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the first track on Olivia Rodrigo's album Guts, "All-American Bitch". A strongly-worded critique of society's expectations from women, this song has everything, from a Kennedy reference to a transition from folk to pop-punk and a scream for the ages. Although not given the full single treatment, it did receive a great SNL performance! I wanted to time this around Election season in America, but no comment on the outcome of said election... I hope all American Wikipedians voted, and thanks a lot to everyone who will take the time to give their feedback here.--NØ 06:43, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Media review - pass

[edit]

Hi MaranoFan, happy to do the media review. The article contains the following media files:

The first two are images licensed under CC BY 2.0. The third one is a copyrighted audio file under fair use with a valid non-free use rationale. I'm not an expert here but the quality may be too high: it's 173 kbps but WP:SAMPLE recommends 64 kbit/s for ogg files.

The media files are relevant to the article and placed in appropriate locations. They all have captions. Both images have alt texts. The last clause of the English caption at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Olivia_Rodrigo_@_Theatre_at_Ace_Hotel_10_09_2023_(53422493857).jpg is a little odd. If "with perfect all American lips and tits" is a direct quote, then it needs quotation marks. Or the clause could simply be removed. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:47, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing the media review, Phlsph7. The 64kbit/s recommendation is referring to the value between length and file size, which is 63 kbps for this file. Similar sizes can be seen on other files like this one.--NØ 11:10, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah right, it seems I read of the kbps value of the mp3 file given at the bottom rather than the kbps value of ogg file itself. The caption has been adjusted, so this takes care of the remaining concern. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:28, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Medxvo

[edit]
  • "Lyrically, it is satire and explores society's ..." - "Lyrically, it is a satire song that explores society's ..."
  • "comparing it to the work of other rock artists" - what is "it"? the production, the song, or the production and her vocals?
  • "In the United States, it debuted at number 13 ..." - "In the United States, "All-American Bitch" debuted at number 13..."—The sentence before this isn't related to the song itself but to the vocals and the production
  • "platinum certification" - "platinum certification"—MOS:PIPE
  • "... on her face. This performance received positive reviews" - "... on her face; the performance received positive reviews from critics"
  • "Dan Nigro returned to produce every single track on it" - did we state in the article before this that Nigro also produced Sour?
  • "Joan Didion's book ..." - "Joan Didion's 1968 book ..."
  • "Initially written on a piano, they turned it into a rock song with a live band" - "Initially written on a piano, the song was turned into a rock song with a live band"—I don't think the first one is grammatically correct
  • "An online TikTok video compared the chorus of "All-American Bitch" to Miley Cyrus's 2008 single "Start All Over" - can we add something like "upon the song's release" to say that this is part of the immediate reception and justify the sentence being in the release section?
  • "Its production received comparisons" - "The song's production received comparisons"—The sentence before this isn't related to the song itself but to Rodrigo's vocals
  • "Laura Snapes described it as ..." - "Laura Snapes described the song as ..."—To clarify that they are talking about the song itself
  • "comparing it to Sour's opener "Brutal" - "comparing it to Sour's opener "Brutal" (2021)"
  • "Some opined that the song would be suitable ..." - can we attribute this to the two sources instead of "some"?
  • "Several others also described Rodrigo's vocals in the verses as angelic, and writing for MusicOMH, John Murphy believed her screams ..." - "Several critics described Rodrigo's vocals in the verses as angelic, with MusicOMH's John Murphy believing her screams ..."
  • "Beats Per Minutes's Lucas ..." - "Beats Per Minute's Lucas ..."
  • "was certified gold" - "was certified gold"
  • "top 10 song" - "top-10 song"
  • "in a concert exclusively for ..." - "in an exclusive concert for ..."
  • "Rodrigo sang it on Saturday Night Live eight days later" - "Rodrigo sang "All-American Bitch" on Saturday Night Live on December 9, 2023"—This is a new paragraph so I'd say the full date
  • "that provided 20 cakes for it became ..." - "that provided 20 cakes for the performance became ..."
  • "the Apple TV+ series The Buccaneers" - "the Apple TV+ series The Buccaneers (2023)"
  • the Guts World Tour is a 2024–2025 concert tour not just a 2024 tour; this is how it's currently considered... (for both the lead and prose)
  • There are incidents of "Guts's ...", "The New York Times's ...", "Chicago Sun-Times's ..." that I think should be "Guts' ...", "The New York Times' ...", "Chicago Sun-Times' ..."

I hope these comments are helpful for now. Best of luck with the FAC! Medxvo (talk) 20:45, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These are all done as well. Thanks for the well wishes!--NØ 18:53, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - pass

[edit]
  • "She references the Kennedy family while encapsulating her desire to meet ideals: "I got class and integrity, just like a goddamn Kennedy" - which part of the NME source supports this claim?
  • the Rolling Stone sources should have a limited access not a subscription access
  • The Wall Street Journal and The Tennessean should have a subscription access
  • The New York Times, The Cut, the Los Angeles Times, The Boston Globe, Vulture, Vogue, and the Minnesota Star Tribune should have a limited access for refs 1, 3, 35, 40, 46, 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99
  • Some sources need to be archived such as refs 44, 78, and 87
  • Why not use this source instead of the Apple TV+ Press source?

Medxvo (talk) 20:45, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I have implemented all the suggestions except an archive for ref 47, since the archive sites just produce a paywall and it has a ProQuest link which are usually not affected by linkrot.--NØ 17:18, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • "returned to produce every single track on it." - i think "returned to produce every track on it." would suffice
  • "Rodrigo would listen to Rage Against the Machine" => "Rodrigo listened to Rage Against the Machine"
  • "some that were uptempo and others that were serious ones" - can a song not be both uptempo and serious.....?
  • There's a bit of inconsistency in tenses - you have "Jason Lipshutz [...] thought it illustrates" (present) but then further on you have "Chris Willman of Variety believed that it tapped into" (past)

Support from Rollinginhisgrave

[edit]

Happy to have a look over. Just a start, I'll continue when I can sit down again.

All done, ping me when you make it through and I'll have another look-over. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 13:00, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Happy with the changes, thankyou so much for your patience :) Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 09:58, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "They commented on Rodrigo's vocal performance and the production" This is very vague, is the rest of the sentence elaborating on what these comments entailed? Else clarify the thrust of what they said (positively, capturing a mood/feeling etc)
  • "comparing the song to the work of other rock artists" I only see one comparison listed.I see now, I was looking in the reception section
  • Some incaution in wikivoice in reception, e.g. "thought it illustrated Rodrigo's talent for "genre refraction"." Even though this puts "genre refraction" in quotes, what is actually being attributed is that he thought it illustrated this, and wikivoice approves that she has this talent.
  • I think the cake should just be called "red"; the source describes it as blood-red to evidence a claim they go onto make which you don't include. Without such a characterization, the red of blood-red is what remains as important.
  • "following which she decided to take a break from songwriting for six months." a bit nitpicky, but it doesn't sound like the break was initiated in reaction to the release, but was pre-meditated. decided to taketook?
  • "Rodrigo listened to Rage Against the Machine on her way to studio sessions, and they became her favorite band." again, some causation that doesn't appear to be in the source, it is equally good reading to say she listened to it every day on the way to and from the studio because it was her favorite band.
  • "of which the more rock-oriented tracks were included on the album" → "including the more rock-oriented tracks on the album"
  • "serious ones"
  • "She was stimulated by the affronting nature of the words" redundancy, particularly in the second half of this is immediately repeated in the quote. Consider linking the preceding sentence with ", later reflecting "
  • "Upon receiving the idea" I find the sourcing on this quite confusing. I can't imagine he's referring to the idea of having a song entitled "All American Bitch", it reads more fleshed out in the source, particularly "You just wrote the opening song of this record." The People source also reads that it was a whole song, although on piano.
  • "she had repressed since the age of 15" She had been trying to express repressed feelings since 15, they weren't repressed at 15
  • "always felt" attribute
  • "pressure to portray gratitude" attribute
  • This isn't a quote, so to whom?
  • It's an interview with Rodrigo. She is a reliable sources for whether she felt pressured, but not whether pressure was being applied. If she had said the opposite, it would be just as true; even if you don't feel pressured it doesn't mean you weren't being pressured.
  • I think I got it now. Reworded to make it more clear this is something she felt.
  • Don't need source [16] "Fans Think Olivia Rodrigo Shared a Snippet of New Song ‘Vampire’: Listen", doesn't add anything
  • "announced the album title on June 26, 2023" Sources listed don't verify this fact. Maybe an archived version did? The Billboard one could not have, given it is dated June 21
  • If you are one for source economy, "Olivia Rodrigo Unveils ‘Guts’ Tracklist" can be cut and "Rodrigo announced... first track" can source both sentences.
  • I prefer keeping more as long as there is no overkill.
  • "in which Rodrigo sports a shirt with a picture of Fiona Apple" explain why this is not as trivial as it reads.
  • I don't think it is a good idea to omit reliable secondary sources' descriptions of performances as triviality is subjective. Rodrigo has cited Apple as an influence on previous music, though, if that helps answer your question.
  • I did read that in the source, and read it using it to make a broader comment on Rodrigo's influences rather than on her being an influence on the song in particular, which is what I would require. If you read this and disagree, I think this may fall to editorial discretion so treat it as a suggestion.
  • "an online TikTok video" I can understand why you add "online", but it reads as boomer-speak
  • In the composition section, surely it was also recorded in Nigro's garage based on the comments on the screaming?
  • Some overreferencing in #Composition, for example does "A full band plays electric guitars and drums in the chorus" need three sources? I can't even see a mention of drums in these sources.
  • Removed one. The drums are mentioned in the Elle source at the end of the sentence. The other two sources are necessary and source different bits of the sentence.
  • "internal screaming" should be reworded to reflect what she is portraying, it is a metaphor. Else should be attributed, in a more concrete way than just quotations
  • It is already attributed as something mentioned in the lyrics. The lyric itself is "I scream inside to deal with it" so I am not sure there is a clearer way to put it without using original research.
  • The "something" herein being the issue. I'll break down my thinking a bit: "She screams loudly after mentioning her internal screaming in the song's lyrics." We take from this: she mentions her internal screaming. This is done in the lyrics. "Mentions" without giving any other considerations implies she is merely commenting on a fact. It is a fact that she has internal screaming, in wikivoice. Internal screaming is a metaphor, see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch#Expressions that lack precision for an expression in the manual of style that we should not use metaphors in wikivoice. That she mentions this in lyrics rather than another medium is an irrelevant consideration within the sentence. You can substitute internal screaming for desire to be a dancer etc to see how the mention of it being featured in the lyrics does not constitute attribution.
  • I have addressed this as best as the sources allow.
  • You use "believed" a lot (15 times), even beyond light concerns with MOS:SAID it reads as very repetitive.
  • Cut down to less than two times in any one paragraph.
  • ""All-American Bitch" is a satire song..." this paragraph endorses in wikivoice Rodrigo's insights into womanhood. "Expressed her concerns of..." framing would be more appropriate. I'll come back to this paragraph when you have a chance to address this.
  • It should be ready for your re-read.
  • I will accept this as it stands, and if I can articulate concerns coherently I will raise them further.
  • "while encapsulating her desire to meet ideals" reads awkwardly
  • "young lady" → woman
  • Another example of incaution in wikivoice in reception: "irrefutable success" is apparently in wikivoice.
  • It is very clearly preceded by "Sowing of Sputnikmusic believed", but I have swapped it out for a direct quote.
  • I will read the rewrite in a bit, but again, what is being attributed is their comment on her having irrefutable success.
  • I've read the rewrite, the issue persists although you have lessened it. The belief being attributed is not that the album was an "undeniable success", but that such success began with All-American Bitch.
  • I can see something similar down the page with "though Rodrigo traipsed through an age-old story". This is not as explicit, but the use of though makes it ambiguous what is in wikivoice (is "Rodrigo traipsed through an age-old story" what McNeal is opining on?). This can be rectified by eliminating "though" and placing "but" at the start of the next clause, hopefully you can see how the sentence reads differently and appropriately attributes opinion.
  • "He was joined by Sheffield and The New York Times' Lindsay Zoladz in comparing it to Sour's opener "Brutal"." you can cut this if you aren't commenting further on the contents of such comparisons.
  • An opinion shared by three sources is a necessary mention imo. What they compared about the two songs differed, and separately including each's opinion would throw off the sectional weightage.
  • Ah. I've had a read of the sources and I understand my confusion. I read "compared to" as simply that made comparisons with it (can be similar, dissimilar etc.), but I think by comparing to you were implying similarity? If so, best to clarify.
  • Done.
  • Mark Murphy, John as requiring registration
  • "Critics also praised" if you are summing up the previous paragraph as "praise", write this rather than "commented on"
  • "embracing the essence of adolescence without attempting to sound prematurely mature" is this not contradictory?
  • "stated his respect for the lyrics about Rodrigo's award acceptance speeches" you haven't said what these are.
  • As in which individual speeches? They are not mentioned by the source and it is more of a general comment.
  • Do you know why she sings about acceptance speeches?
  • Assumably, award acceptance speeches would be one of the venues where a famous woman would feel pressure to appear grateful. Apologies for not being able to include this in the article, as my reading does not appear in sources.
  • "most impeccable" sounds hyperbolic
  • "number five by BBC News and in the top 20" I would say these numbers are comparable enough for MOS:NUMBER to apply: "comparable numbers near one another should all be written in words or all in figures". Same with ""All-American Bitch" charted at number nine"
  • "fluctuating between jumping, screaming, and singing delicately" redundant; this is the layout of the song and has been expressed exhaustively.
  • "became popular on social media." MOS:DATED, the claim is more broad than the ten days afforded by the sources.
  • "On December 13, the singer Noelle Denton alleged that the concept was "stolen" from the music video for her 2021 song "Your Mom Calls Me" and the creative director might have seen her video when it was shared by a mutual friend." With comments like this, how do you determine whether inclusion gives appropriate weight, given Wikipedia:Verifiability#Verifiability does not guarantee inclusion?
  • I would have definitely ignored it if a reputed source like HuffPost did not write a dedicated article. It's just one sentence in a big section/article so I think we are alright, though.
  • I understand, thankyou for clarifying. I will leave two thoughts here for your consideration, and I will leave it to your judgement. 1) Googling Noelle Denton, she does not have a Wikipedia page, and many of the first results on Google are her accusation against Rodrigo. I am not sure how WP:BLP1E applies here; I am not so familiar with BLP policy. 2) The HuffPost article is filed under entertainment which does not appear to be held to the same quality or noteworthiness standards as their news articles; even just looking at another article the author of the article has published: Glen Powell Offers Winner Of His Look-Alike Contest A 'Personal Prize', would you consider this to be DUE in any content about Powell?
  • I prefer to keep this in so I appreciate you giving me leeway with this. Admittedly, I do not feel comfortable omitting an entire article, especially when it is some of the only negative coverage related to the subject. I agree with you that Denton does not meet the notability guidelines for a dedicated biography article.
I sympathize with this, my thinking is moving from this preference for including some negative coverage so the article can read as neutral to understanding it as promoting false balance and separate from considerations of WP:BALANCE. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 09:58, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "which recalls 1990s rock artists" the set or Get Him Back!?
  • I think it is clear this is referring to the set, personally? Why would it be referencing just one song in a list of many? But do share any rephrasing suggestions you may have.
  • Perhaps inserting "together" between which and recalls. If you think this is an unreasonable/silly read, ignore.
  • "sang the original lyric" some ambiguity in "original", new or first one written?
  • Both the Rolling Stone and Stereogum sources use the term "original", so, even putting aside sticking with the source, one has to assume the word choice must be clear enough.
  • "left everyone's hearing permanently damaged" one of the more troubling examples of "believed" around MOS:SAID

Some more nitpicky points that may go more to preferences although I will claim they allow it to read easier:

  • "where one of the runaway hippies" → wherein / in which
  • "on the screen" → on a screen

Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 01:36, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the in-depth review, Rollinginhisgrave. I have asked for some minor suggestions and made the rest of the changes.--NØ 22:05, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Query for the coordinators

[edit]

@FAC coordinators: May I nominate another one if it's okay? I have a three-day weekend, which I would like to use for it.--NØ 04:43, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:54, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aoba47

[edit]
  • For this part, (a Vevo Live performance of it in an abandoned theater), I do not think "of it" is necessary.
  • This is likely a matter of personal preference, but I am never a fan of placing citations in spots that cut up a few words in a sentence. By that, I am referencing the citation placement for this part, (Sour's producer). While I do understand the purpose of clearly matching the citations with the support material, I find that it impends readability. That being said, I will leave it up to you and it will not hold back my review in any way.
  • I am uncertain on who is saying the following quote, "choir of screams". There are other quotes earlier in this section that are not directly attributed, "lots of confusion, mistakes, awkwardness & good old fashioned teen angst" and "bridge this together", but the prose provides context for the speaker. In this instance, I was more so left wondering about where this quote came from.
  • For this sentence, (Upon the album's release, a TikTok video compared the chorus of "All-American Bitch" to Miley Cyrus's 2008 single "Start All Over".), it may be helpful to clarify that this was a popular TikTok video. When I first read this, it came off as a bit random so I think that adding further context about its popularity would better solidify its relevance and reason for inclusion.
  • The percussion instrument link seems a bit unnecessary to me as I would imagine that most readers would already be familiar with this. I would think links to something like synthesizer or drum programming would be more helpful if you wish to add links here.
  • I am uncertain about the word choice for this sentence, (He was joined by Sheffield and The New York Times' Lindsay Zoladz in drawing parallels to Sour's opener "Brutal".), and by that, I specifically mean the "joined by" part. Jason Lipshutz did not really join together or do anything collectively with either of the two other critics so it would be better to find a better transition for this.
  • The second paragraph of the "Critical reception" section has two sentences in a row that use "opined". Two paragraphs in a row for that section start with "also praised".
  • Why not have a topic sentence for the last paragraph of the "Critical reception" section?
  • For this sentence, (GQ included the Kennedy reference in its list of the album's standout and "gutsiest" lyrics, and Nylon included it alongside the titular lines in its list of Guts' impeccable lyrics.), I would avoid using "included" twice.
  • Is the Guts World Tour image a photo of her performing the song?
  • Probably not, but there should be a photo to go on the main page with the article and this one is well-suited in my opinion. I don't think the one in the red outfit of her performing "Obsessed" complements the critical descriptions of this particular song as "angelic", etc.
  • Was there any follow-up or further developments for Noelle Denton's claims that the performance concept was stolen?
  • There is nothing in secondary sources that could be included here.
  • This part, (which together recalls 1990s rock artists like Alanis Morissette and Gwen Stefani according to Chicago Sun-Times' Selena Fragassi), feels tacked on to an already long sentence. I would separate this as its own sentence.
  • Were there any reviews or comments on the song's use for the The Buccaneers trailer?
  • There are just passing mentions of it being used but no comments or anything critical.

Wonderful work as always. I hope that this review helps. My comments are focused on the prose. Once everything has been addressed, I will read through the article a few more times just to make sure that I have not missed anything. I hope that this will help push this FAC over the finishing line to get it promoted. Have a great rest of your day and/or night! Aoba47 (talk) 01:47, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for the review, Aoba47! I was going to ask for your help/review on this nomination, so the timing is great. I am excited for your re-read and hope your week is going well.--NØ 09:12, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am glad that I could help! I will re-read the article later tonight. I do not imagine that I will find anything, or at least anything significant. Aoba47 (talk) 15:32, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Everything looks good to me. I support this FAC for promotion based on the prose. If possible, I would greatly appreciate any help with my current peer review, but I completely understand if you do not have the time or interest. Great work again. Aoba47 (talk) 17:03, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comments

[edit]
  • "Lyrically, it is a satire song". Should that be 'satirical'? (An open question, not a nudge.)

Gog the Mild (talk) 17:56, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Revised--NØ 17:59, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/All-American_Bitch/archive1&oldid=1263148734"