Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Better Than Today/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
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 18:28, 3 April 2011 [1].

Better Than Today edit

Better Than Today (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): I Help, When I Can. [12] 01:04, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article because it meets Featured article criteria, providing a complete and interesting view on the song. I Help, When I Can. [12] 01:04, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose needs significant copy-editing/rewriting throughout. The following are only a sample:

  • "Pop, synthpop": that's a redundancy. I think synthpop should suffice?
    • I'm just gonna put pop. That's some of the unsourced stuff I forgot to get rid of. Done. I Help, When I Can. [12] 18:18, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "After debuting on the chart early with album downloads, it peaked on the UK Singles Chart at number 32, making it her lowest charting on that chart...". Also watch out for overuse of "song".
    • The sentence cited has been modified. Done. Considering there aren't lots of synonyms that work with "song", I can't do anything abouth the majority of it. I Help, When I Can. [12] 18:18, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Copy-editing needed: "Reception for the video was mainly positive, with most noting...", "The video reflected the fashion and choreography of the performances of the song done during her 2009 For You, For Me Tour, where she first debuted the song".
  • You say the song "received positive to mixed reviews" from critics, twice in the article. Does that make any sense? If it received "mixed" reviews, isn't it understood that the song was acclaimed from some critics?
    • That's what I thought too, but in a previous review I learned that a mixed review is understood as a single review with positives and negatives. I Help, When I Can. [12] 18:18, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Overlinking: laser beams, microphone stand, etc.—indopug (talk) 13:44, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  • "accommodating and lovely and approachable and normal [sic]" - why the "sic" here? AFAICT it's correct
  • Agree that copy-editing is needed. For example, "After the final chorus cuts through all scenes." is not a complete sentence
  • Text needs to be more accessible to people who don't know much about music. For example, most will not be familiar with the subscript notation for octave
    • ...which is why the musical terms are linked. I really don't know how to make the section more accessible without writing a "Music Theory for Dummies" paragraph in the section. I Help, When I Can. [12] 18:18, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Manual of Style work needed - wikilinking, hyphens/dashes, captions, etc
  • What makes this a reliable source? This? This?
    • Those citations are used for published opinion. You will notice that I haven't used them to verify any of the facts in the article. I Help, When I Can. [12] 18:18, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reference formatting needs cleanup - web citations need retrieval dates, I'm pretty sure this isn't the link you wanted for Idolator, etc Nikkimaria (talk) 15:45, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since reviewers have given only samples of prose issues, and there are is other work needed, this article might benefit from a peer review first, and doesn't appear ready for FAC at this time. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:27, 3 April 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://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Better_Than_Today/archive1&oldid=1208174712"