Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/We R Who We R/archive2

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 not promoted by SandyGeorgia 03:26, 27 May 2011 [1].

We R Who We R

[edit]

We R Who We R (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 22:32, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because... Ive worked on this article since day one, it just passed its GA nomination and i think it meets/or is close to meeting FA standards. Please leave your comments below and thank you. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 22:20, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My last FA nomination of this article was opposed due to two sources. Before commenting on the article i will explain why they are reliable. WP:SOURCES; "What counts as a reliable source?"

  • About.com; Bill Lamb from About.com is an established author that is a "music journalist specializing in pop music" and contains a substantial background as he has been writing for over ten years. Besides his credentials the website itself is published, supported and funded by one of the most reliable sources out there, The New York Times Company. According to WP:SOURCES this website seems to meet criteria, WP:CONSENSUS among music editors have deemed this as a reliable source, there are hundreds if not 1000's of articles on here (alot of GA's included) that use this as a source.
  • Yahoo.ca, Yahoo blog is written by senior Billboard editor Paul Grein who has direct info from Nielsen. Please see WP:NEWSBLOG "Several newspapers host columns they call blogs. These are acceptable as sources if the writers are professionals and the blog is subject to the newspaper's full editorial control." which is exactly what this is. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 22:20, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Not that its completely necessary if difficult, but would it be possible to add some more information, possibly Kesha's personal thoughts or quotes on the "writing and inspiration" behind the song? I find the section particularly light on information, so I feel it would benefit with more background information. Additionally, the sources need some work. Several are not properly linked or formatted; many are missing publishers or works and other similar issues. Once these are addressed I'll happily go forth to the prose.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 22:50, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Im trying to expand writing but thats extremely difficult to do as there isnt that much info regarding it. But as for the references, please elaborate as i just rechecked them and i can find no issues what so ever that you listed, all contain publisher and work fields (some just publisher as only one is available) and they are all consistent. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 23:01, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, I understand if that kind of information is not available. That is usually the hardest section to expand. As for the sources, I will post you several examples a bit later :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 00:47, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - as a general comment, sourcing requirements at FA are higher than in most other areas of the project, requiring high-quality reliable sources (above the minimum standards imposed by WP:SOURCES). Yahoo is not a newspaper and I don't see any evidence that they maintain full editorial oversight of the blogs they host; do you have information to the contrary? Do you have any WP:RSN or WP:FAC discussions supporting this type of use of About.com or a Yahoo blog? Some other concerns:

    • Again Nikki, those two sources were already discussed in the "Single Ladies" FAC. Please look into it. As for the prose, I don't think its fair to provide one example (it makes sense to me, how would you improve it?) and slap an oppose. Could you give a few examples and suggestions to help him out? Quoting; again, examples? Thanks--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 08:38, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'll wait for another experienced FAC reviewer or two to weigh in on sources. As for your other points: I don't know how to improve that sentence, because I'm honestly having trouble deciphering what it means; since you do understand, could you clarify? Some other examples: "It also accomplished top-five positions" - "accomplished" is not the right word, "attained" would be better; "the lyrics were representative of Kesha and her fans stories" - grammar; ""We R Who We R" is a solid kickoff" - colloquial phrasing. For quoting, aside from the multiple MoS issues involved with its use here, one example of overuse is the first paragraph of "Live performances", where the quote is an almost exact repetition of the preceding text. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:16, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • "In mid 2010, suicide rates amongst gay teenagers experienced a sudden surge. In September 2010, at least six adolescents took their lives due to different contributing factors all related to gay-bullying.[1] After reading about the surge of gay teen related suicides, Kesha was inspired to write "We R Who We R"." There is nothing confusing about this sentence, i think you need to re-read it. "Accomplished" has been changed to "attained" although both are the exact same meaning. "the lyrics were representative" has been reworded. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 19:23, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • Sure that sounds appropriate. There are several sourcing experts that patrol around the FAC from time to time, lets wait for them. Now as for that sentence "upon reading about the increasing amount of gay teen suicides" I mean this one I don't agree with. The others you mentioned definitely do need work, those I agree with. I appreciate the extra examples, they help the nominator understand the prose issues.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 18:10, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More sources issues: On the basis of the information provided and previous discussions, I think that the about.com and the Paul Grein sources can be accepted as reliable. I do however have further source-related issues:-

  • Citation 31 supports the statement: "The song has since been certified gold for sales of 10,000 units by the Swedish Recording Industry Association (GLF)". The source consists of an unheaded list of 60 songs of which "We R..." is No. 47. It is not obvious how the list supports the cited statement.
    • References 31, it brings you [2] which lists the song as certified gold, which means according to IFPI 10,000 sales means gold. Should i add an addition reference to show the sales?
      • My problem with the source is that the list seems to have no heading or explanatory material. How does one know that it is a list of songs certified gold? Brianboulton (talk) 20:22, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Sverigetopplistan "is the Swedish national record chart" which is what is used to show Swedish charting for music articles. Hung Medien is also acceptable but that does not show certifications, there is an official PDF from the website BUT We R Who We R has not been added to list as of yet. Thus, the link i have provided it perfectly acceptable as it is the official publisher of the chart. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 20:44, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm a bit confused by the "Track listing" section. How is the one-item digital download a "track listing"? Some brief explanatory text should precede the details. Also:-
    • Citation 43 goes to a page with a different title from that indicated. Is the url correct?
      • Link went dead, has been removed.
    • Citation 44; The publisher is the German Amazon and the site language is German. These need to be indicated.
      • Done, thank you.
  • Release history section: Why does Germany appear twice in the table? It is not clear that the sparse details in this section represent a release "history"; the information is limited to dates. So far as I can see, the citations 68 to 79 don't actually give this date information.
Two Germany's to indicate two different releases, a Digital release, and a CD release, that is why we have a format field. And refs 68 and 79 both state what is cited. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 22:29, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton (talk) 21:45, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First, thank you for weighing in on the above issue and for reviewing the article. I believe all concerns have been addressed. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 22:29, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have done another round of copy edits. The User:GregU/dashes.js found no issues with hyphens, and the User:Cameltrader/Advisor found no issues with ellipsis. Hope this helps. --Diannaa (Talk) 04:42, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm, hadn't seen that advisor script before, I'll have to try it out sometime! However, I should point out that it doesn't catch all the potential issues - for example, placing ellipses within parentheses in quotes, which is contraindicated by the MoS. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:05, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support – no obvious issues and meets all meets all FAC criteria. Wouldn't mind giving it the green light. Sp33dyphil Ready • to • Rumble 13:31, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

"publisher: Publisher, if any—for example if the website is hosted by a government service, educational institution, or company. (The publisher is not usually the name of the website, that is usually the work)." Work is different than publisher, under work field only newspapers and online magazines are to be in italics. The work field automatically italicizes everything hence why i have ' '. to remove the italics. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 02:10, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I have read through the article in the last few days and am pretty satisfied with the current prose. As for other items on the checklist, I think this article covers them quite fine. Nice work CK ;)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 11:53, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments
  • Can you come up with a better opening song? If I knew nothing about the song and I stumbled across the page, I wouldn't be interested in reading it, despite how important the song was. Even something as minor as "...was a #1 hit" or something would be more fun. Alternatively, it could be merged with the subsequent sentence ("...was the first single from...")
  • "Kesha was inspired to write the song in the wake of news that bullying had led to multiple suicides of gay youth in hopes that it would become a pride anthem." - that sentence is a bit lengthy. Might I suggest restructuring it something like, "In the wake of news that bullying had led to multiple suicides of gay youth, Kesha wrote the song in hopes that it would become a pride anthem." I didn't want to outright make the change, in case you came up with something better, but currently it reads rather wonkily.
  • I notice the second paragraph talks a lot in the present. For example, "has been compared", "has been generally positive" (although "it was criticized" is past tense). Was that a stylistic preference, or has that prose simply not been changed since the song was still current?
  • "...reviewers felt that the song was a strong dance-pop number that combined a good rhythm with an inspiring message filled with genuine humor." - can you do something to that to make it read better? Right now it doesn't feel the prose is as good as it could be.
  • Is there a more recent sales estimate than March 2011?
  • The last lede paragraph feels rather week, prose-wise, seeing as it is entirely in passive voice. Could you try working on that a bit?
  • A lot of the "writing and inspiration" section is filled with quotes. Couldn't you take at least one of those quotes and explain it in prose? It's an encyclopedia, not a repository of quotes ;)
  • Speaking of the writing section, so how exactly did five people write a song as simple as this? I'm not taking a jab at Kesha, just making an observation as a musician, but who did what? Did Kesha just write the lyrics, and the other people provide the music and stuff? Did she pick the key?
  • Can you give a specific example for this phrase - "Vocally, the song follows in the footsteps of Kesha's previous single"? Or am I to assume that the later reference to Tik-Tok addresses this?
  • Did anyone other than Rolling Stone not give it a positive review (and for that matter an actual negative review)? Did any legitimate (classical, trained) musicians comment on the song?
  • In "Chart performance", you might wanna mention when "Love the Way You Lie" was. For all I know, it could've been back in 2000, which would've made this song's feat all the more impressive.
  • "noting that it was going to show a sexier side of herself. She elaborated, "This video is a little bit 'sexy time'." - these two phrases are really redundant given the quote.
  • In "Live performances", I really expected to see a mention of the song being performed in her concerts. I assume, given its popularity, that it would be given prominence in her tours.
  • I'm surprised there is no mention of Raise Your Glass, which has a similar theme of being oneself.

Overall a decent read, but not quite what I expected out of a prospective FA. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:05, 24 May 2011 (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/We_R_Who_We_R/archive2&oldid=1080989522"