Wikipedia:Peer review/Not Strong Enough (Boygenius song)/archive1
Not Strong Enough (Boygenius song) edit
| Toolbox |
|---|
This is currently at GAN, but I am also listing it here because my ultimate goal is to get this to FAC within the next couple months, and I recently learned that a pre-FAC peer review can take place at the same time as a GAN. Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 01:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
@Dylan620: This has been open for over two months without comments. Are you still looking for feedback, or can this PR be closed and the article nominated to FAC? Z1720 (talk) 17:26, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Z1720, thank you for checking in. I am still looking for feedback as of now – this will be my first FAC (not counting a misguided drive-by from when I was new), and I'd like to be as prepared as I can be. Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 18:53, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Dylan620: I suggest that you seek a mentor: the mentor can comment here to give feedback. I also suggest that you review WP:FAC nominations so that you can improve your knowledge of the FA criteria and build goodwill and confidence amongst the FA community. Z1720 (talk) 01:53, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Z1720: Funnily enough, I did reach out to one of the mentors on his talk page a few hours before your ping, though I haven't heard back from him just yet. Will review FAC nominations during the next week or so. Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 20:56, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Z1720 – as much as I wish this PR had attracted more attention, I think it's time to close up shop. I received valuable feedback from my FAC mentor and I have a clear vision of how I want to improve the article so it meets the FA criteria. I hope to ship it off to FAC sometime in mid-June. Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 21:53, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Z1720: Funnily enough, I did reach out to one of the mentors on his talk page a few hours before your ping, though I haven't heard back from him just yet. Will review FAC nominations during the next week or so. Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 20:56, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Dylan620: I suggest that you seek a mentor: the mentor can comment here to give feedback. I also suggest that you review WP:FAC nominations so that you can improve your knowledge of the FA criteria and build goodwill and confidence amongst the FA community. Z1720 (talk) 01:53, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Aoba47 edit
- I am guessing there is no cover art for this single?
- I do not think this part, (where it appears as the sixth track), is notable enough to include in the lead.
- For this part, (incorporates elements of genres such as jangle pop, pop music, country, new wave, and punk), I would drop the "genres such as" to be more concise and just say "incorporates elements of X genres".
- I get what this part, (with a specific focus on a narrator simultaneously experiencing contradictory mental states of self-loathing and inflated self-worth), means, but I am curious if it could be condensed. The overall sentence is rather wordy already. I could certain words like "specific" and "simultaneously" being dropped. Maybe something like (with a focus on a narrator feeling contradictory feelings of self-loathing and inflated self-worth)?
- I am uncertain of phrases such as "moderately successful" and " minor chart presence" in the lead. It would be best to let the numbers speak for themselves as these metrics can be relative.
- For this part, (was named the best song of the year by Spin, the Los Angeles Times, and Uproxx), I do not think it is necessary to list the publications in the lead. I believe saying that it was named the best song of the year is sufficient.
- For this part, (and for what was perceived by critics as an uplifting aura that contrasted with the relatively dark subject matter of the lyrics), I would remove "for what was perceived by critics" as it was already implied earlier in the sentence that this was what critics thought of the video.
- The placement of the 66th Annual Grammy Awards information at the end of the lead feels tacked-on, and I believe it should be better incorporated into the lead itself.
- Make sure to link Boygenius on the first use in the article.
- For this sentence, (After the 2018 release of Boygenius' self-titled EP, the trio worked on their solo projects.), I would more explicitly introduce who the trio is. Remember that not all readers who come to this article will be familiar with this group so they may not know who "the trio" is until they get to the next sentence.
- I would be mindful that not all readers will be familiar with the concept of an extended play or its EP acronym. I would find a way to parse this self-titled EP link out so you could link and fully spell out extended play to help clarify this for readers.
- In the "Music" subsection, there is a sentence with six citations. To avoid concerns with WP:Citation overkill, I would suggest doing something like WP:Citation bundling.
- Information from the "Credits and personnel" section should also be present in the prose of the article.
I hope that it is okay to add comments to this peer review. I know that you have recently said you wanted to withdraw it, but I wanted to try and help out. I hope that this is helpful, and best of luck with the future FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 02:15, 9 June 2024 (UTC)