Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Vanishing (song)/archive1

Vanishing (song)

Featured article candidates/Vanishing (song)/archive1

Nominator(s): Heartfox (talk) 18:52, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Vanishing" is the first song that Mariah Carey ever produced. I started this article about a month ago and I really like how it turned out. Thanks in advance for your comments, Heartfox (talk) 18:52, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ippantekina

Comments soon. Ippantekina (talk) 02:59, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comma after "debut studio album"
Added
This is kinda convoluted: "Vanishing is a torch song ... She wrote the ballad ...". I would suggest something like, introducing it as a song by Carey, and the second sentence elaborates on its nature ("It is a torch song with a balladic production")
Reworded/moved "torch song" to second sentence and "ballad" to last sentence
"Situated in the gospel and traditional pop music genres" I'm all for phrasing variations but this reads kinda flowery for an encyclopedic entry. Maybe something more straightforward like "Categorized in the gospel and traditional pop genres"?
Changed to "categorized"
I notice inconsistent usages of false titles throughout: "American singer Mariah Carey", "the drummer Ben Margulies", "the American television program Saturday Night Live". Please be consistent throughout.
I think they're all there now
"Rather than release it as a single" releasing?
Changed to "releasing"
"A blues-inspired[17] gospel[18] and traditional pop record" I think "record" is often used for albums and not tracks. Maybe "song" or "number"?
Changed to "number"
I'm not sure if citing album liner notes for lyrics is the best practice, unless that lyric has been specified in album reviews or analyses.
Ugh I knowwww but "You're vanishing / Drifting away" is basically the entire chorus and the gist of the song. I think four words is okay to quote without specific secondary coverage.
I'm not sure if the hyperlink to oscillate makes sense because the link leads to an article about physics.
Removed link
"Its straightforward composition" not sure what straightforward means in this context.
Changed to "Its composition is straightforward". This is meant to introduce the statement following the semi-colon: "an acoustic piano played by Richard Tee is the sole instrumentation" (ie straightforward/little going on)

Not sure if that's the correct lingo because I've seen something like "minimalist", "spare" but not "straightforward"... Ippantekina (talk) 03:52, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just decided to remove the clause as "sole instrumentation" seems to get the point across okay

"Patrick Dillett performed engineering and mixing" I know the issue with sea of blue but can one perform engineering and mixing?
Added "the": "performed the engineering and mixing"

I mean like "to perform engineering/mixing" reads award? Maybe some safe options like "The track was engineered and mixed by..." Ippantekina (talk) 03:52, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Added your suggestion

"Unlike "Vision of Love", Richard T. Ryan of the Staten Island Advance said" wrong subject here
Changed to "Richard T. Ryan of the Staten Island Advance said "Vanishing" demonstrated Carey could limit the use of her vocal range, unlike "Vision of Love"."
"in which she exercised commendable discipline with her voice" err.. I get what this means but this reads lengthy. Can we make it more concise?
Changed to "in which Carey used her voice judiciously"
"Critics have viewed "Vanishing" as a standout track in Carey's discography ~~throughout her career~~"
Removed "throughout her career"
"Courier-Post contributor Jeff Hall considered the song her best work in 1993" does this mean that the song was considered Carey's best among her 1993 songs?
Changed to "in a 1993 article"
Which makes me notice.. is there not a release date in the Infobox?
I think there is a difference among editors of whether album tracks should get infobox release dates. I don't personally care either way, it just seems to be a thing so I wasn't sure and have not added it.

I think it is necessary to include album release dates as well to indicate that the song has been released commercially. A short sentence in the prose would do (like, the album was released on XXX, "Vanishing" is track number X). If there are no release dates that it would be an unreleased song imo lol. Ippantekina (talk) 03:52, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Added release date to prose and infobox
The third paragraph of the "Critical reception" is full of "A said, B said, C said..." I suggest some more cohesion here
Cut down on the paragraph length by converting three sentences to sfns of the opening sentence. Made several wording changes.
"Entertainment Weekly writer Sydney Bucksbaum and Billboard's Gil Kaufman considered the performance impressive" this adds little value to prose imo.
Cut

My review is exclusively on prose and that should be it :) Ippantekina (talk) 04:56, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ippantekina: Thank you for the very helpful comments, responded to all above. Heartfox (talk) 22:31, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for addressing my comments! I've responded to a few remaining points above :) Ippantekina (talk) 03:52, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ippantekina: Responded above. Heartfox (talk) 18:42, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support on prose — Ippantekina (talk) 02:25, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Medxvo

I would be consistent with the WP:FALSETITLES. "recorded and produced by the American singer Mariah Carey" seems to be the only one with no false title
Removed "the"
"I enjoyed doing that because it gave me more freedom to sing" - enjoyed doing what?
I thought it would be known that this is referring to "Vanishing" as this is preceded by the phrase "Carey described "Vanishing" as her favorite track on the album:"
It was quite confusing to me so I checked the source and it seems like she's referring to the acoustic elements not the song as a whole, but even Carey's sentence structure is confusing to me so I guess that's fine. I suggest double-checking, though
I think maxi single can be linked
Linked
"according to Stephen Holden" - a comma before according to?
Added comma
"in the book Soul Music A–Z" - "in the book Soul Music A–Z (1991)"?
Added 1991

I believe that's all I've got. Best of luck with the FAC! Medxvo (talk) 23:02, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Medxvo: Thanks for your comments, I have responded above. Heartfox (talk) 23:38, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Medxvo (talk) 07:56, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aoba47

Is Tatou notable enough to mention in the lead? I was wondering if this part could be shortened to "at a New York City club" with the specific name kept for the article itself.
Changed to "at a New York City club"
The Butterfly World Tour article claims that Carey performed this song at the second Sydney show. I would not be surprised if this type of detail did not receive any coverage, but I wanted to bring this up just in case. I believe this is the only other time she performed this.
It didn't receive any coverage that I could find
I thought that would be case, but I just wanted to double-check to make sure of this point. Aoba47 (talk) 23:29, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This may just be a matter of personal preference, but I would not use a PhD thesis as a source for Wikipedia unless parts of it were published elsewhere or it became notable on its own for whatever reason. I am always weary from my own personal experience with theses as the amount of oversight that it receives can and does really vary. WP:SCHOLARSHIP says that while they can be used, this should be done with care and caution. Is there any evidence this thesis is notable enough? Like has it been cited in the literature; supervised by recognized specialists in the field; or reviewed by independent parties?
I think it being a humanities thesis this is a different situation than something like a science field where maybe there is more potential for controversy idk. All that the thesis supports is that Carey uses whispering in the song and that the writer thinks it contributed to her artistic identity on the album. The thesis had 3 people on the dissertation committee and 4 examiners. Personally I would consider this a step-up from most secondary sources. These are not bold claims.
I do understand your point. Thank you for taking the time to explain. I respectfully disagree. I would have an issue with a thesis for both the humanities and for the sciences. That being said, my review is focused on the prose. The thesis is not used for anything controversial or contentious so I will leave that up to the source review. It will not affect my review and my likely support. I wanted to ask you about it as it did caught my eye. While we may disagree, I hope that this response comes across as collaborative as I do genuinely understand your perspective. Aoba47 (talk) 23:29, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am uncertain about this part, (the 2008 season of television program American Idol), as I have never really heard television seasons, at least in the US, referenced by the year of their release. I get that it makes things more concise, but it would just more natural to use seventh season and putting the year somewhere else in the same sentence.
Converted to "seventh season", put "2008" at end of sentence
Were there any reviews for Kelly Clarkson's covers? Based on the titles for the citations, there seem to be praise for it.
Yes but Ippantekina thought they didn't add anything to the article
That is fair. Apologies for that as I did not look at the previous reviews. I was trying to think of ways to revise the sentence to include that this performance was praised, but I can see why that would not be necessary and how it could come across as rather empty since there would not be further details about it. It is always best to keep things more concise so it is for the best. Aoba47 (talk) 23:29, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I hope that this review is helpful. Once all of my comments have been addressed, I will read through the article a few more times just to make sure that I have not missed anything. Best of luck with the FAC, and I hope you are having a wonderful weekend so far! Aoba47 (talk) 14:56, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review :) Heartfox (talk) 20:14, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am glad that I could help. This is a great song. I will read through the article again later tonight. I do not imagine that I will find anything further, but I like to just make sure. Aoba47 (talk) 23:29, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have read through the article again, and I could not find anything further to comment on. 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. As always, I enjoy reading your work, and I look forward to review your FACs in the future. Aoba47 (talk) 00:44, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]