Talk:By the Grace of God (song)

Notability

How exactly is this song notable enough to have its own article? It isn't a single or even a promotional single. Besides, this hasn't exactly left much impact. For now, I am tagging this as having questionable notability. 174.226.2.97 (talk) 00:41, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

The notability relies on having important information about the topic that the article covers, for example for a song, it needs to have charted, which it did. It may not be a single or even a promotional one, but it has sufficient information, and plus, a DYK reviewer removed the notability tag. Do not add it again or I will request for article protection. Check "Fading", for example, which has been certified as a good article. prism △ 17:13, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Charted or not, it lacks impact/global significance. That's why the questionable notability tag was added. Not much point in having an article on something that is so widely unheard of (such as this) by people who aren't music critics and/or fans of her music. 174.252.36.62 (talk) 18:57, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Doesn't matter. By your logic, most song-related good articles should be deleted. Do not add it again. prism △ 21:23, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Not exactly what I meant. This could achieve significance later on- for all we know, it could be a #1 single someday. For now though, it should redirect to the Prism album page. 174.252.32.221 (talk) 02:18, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Check Red Lipstick, Do Ya Thang (Rihanna song), Fool in Love... they're album tracks with not that much importance, but there's enough information and if there is, why not have a page for it? Plus, they're good articles: reliability wasn't the issue, for sure... prism △ 11:01, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Reliability of sources certainly isn't the problem with this page. If something doesn't have much importance, it just seems excessive to give it an article of its own. It's definitely too soon to have a page for this song- at least wait until it has received notability such as significant praise/controversy if not released as a single/promotional single. If it becomes vital like Harlem Shake or Numa Numa, that would also make it more suitable to have an article for this. 174.252.38.30 (talk) 20:42, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Let's close the discussion: if articles for songs like this that weren't released as (promotional) singles are approved for Good Article quality and criteria, "By the Grace of God" deserves this article. And soon this will also be GA-nominated. Prιsm △ 21:39, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

If it ever becomes significant to her career, then it can have its own article. Since it currently has no significance to her career, there's really no point in having it yet. We also frankly don't need an article for every song from the Teenage Dream album and Complete Confection. The only ones we really need are the promotional singles and the eight singles. From Prism, only the singles and promotional singles have had any significance to her career. 174.254.178.131 (talk) 15:52, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

This is turning quite annoying, but let me say it once and for all: if we have enough information to describe a song, its composition, its influences, its chart performance, its critical reception, of course we should have an article that contains such information, like it happens with "By the Grace of God". I, for example, when I want to listen to an album or something, I come here and it's really helpful to have some details on determined song, and not just on any kind of singles! You're not in charge of just deciding to remove an article and an individual's work just because it hasn't got any relevance on the public eye. Prιsm △ 16:36, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

This song definitely deserves this article! This song is about how Katy Perry's faith in God saved her life, and kept her from committing suicide. Without this song, there would be no Prism, nor would any of her future works exist either, since Katy would no longer be alive.

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:By the Grace of God (song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: WikiRedactor (talk · contribs) 19:01, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

General

• Please correct these external links.

I think I corrected one link, but I can't correct the Plugged In link (yellow). Could you do that please, or teach me how to do it?

I tested this link myself, and it seems to be working fine, so we can just leave it.

• This may just be my personal preference, but I'd replace all instances of "the singer" with "Perry".

 Done, although in the first sentence of Background section I changed "the singer" to "she" so Perry didn't repeat.

That's fine!

• Move the "External links" section after "References".

 Done

Introduction

• The release date provided is simply that of the parent album, so it does not need to be included in the infobox.

 Done, removed.

• "Upon the release of Prism, contemporary music critics received "By the Grace of God" favorably: many of whom highlighted its vulnerability and the fact that it was only composed by Perry and Wells, thus making it a standout from its parent album. Anyhow, some found that it was "ridden with cliché". Additionally, its placement on the tracklist of the album was also criticized." This thought could be rewritten like "Upon the release of Prism, "By the Grace of God" received generally favorable reviews from music critics, who appreciated its vulnerability but criticized its placement on the record."

 Done

• Instead of saying "it managed to enter", just say "it entered", and replace the term "positions" with "numbers".

 Done

Critical response

• I'd recommend renaming this section "Critical reception".

 Done

• "Initial criticism of "By the Grace of God" was generally positive." This thought could be rewritten like "Upon its release, "By the Grace of God" received generally favorable reviews from music critics."

 Done

Chart performance

• I'd recommend renaming this section "Commercial performance".

 Done

Track listing

• I don't think this section is necessary, since all of this information is already covered in the infobox in greater detail.

 Done, removed

Chart positions

• I'd recommend renaming this section "Charts".

 Done

I spot-checked references along the way, and they all sourced the information they were supposed to. Once these comments are addressed, I don't see any issues with passing the article. WikiRedactor (talk) 19:18, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

I think it's all done, thank you for reviewing the article! Prism △ 11:52, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

I'm happy with all the changes made and will pass the article. Good work and Merry Christmas! WikiRedactor (talk) 17:01, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on By the Grace of God (song). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131103073904/http://gaonchart.co.kr/digital_chart/download.php?nationGbn=E&current_week=44&current_year=2013&chart_Time=week to http://gaonchart.co.kr/digital_chart/download.php?nationGbn=E&current_week=44&current_year=2013&chart_Time=week

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:45, 28 July 2017 (UTC)