Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Crazy in Love/archive1

Crazy in Love

Support Detailed information on this hit song with chart performances, music video and influences.

• Oppose. For starters there are no references. Evil Monkey∴Hello 04:44, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Support Evil Monkey∴Hello 09:56, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
• Object. The image Image:Crazy In Love.jpg has no source or copyright information. --Carnildo 07:09, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose- as above, no references, no copyright info. A sample would be great, as would some kind of critical comment. It's better than many articles about hit singles but does not compare well to existing featured articles such as She Loves You or Layla. Writing style could be sharpened - need to remove "fanzine" type language and colloquialisms. Examples:
  
  • "it also hit number one "
    

**"the song also raised eyebrows"
**"Knowles began shopping for beats"
**"hungover from a night of partying"
**"it would either flop horribly or take off"
**"Unfortunately for Beyoncé" (conveys a point of view)
**Two sentences that begin with "Internationally speaking" and one "domestically speaking" are awkward at best but references to the "domestic market" assume the reader to be American. Obviously the reference is to the American market - so that's what it should say. Rossrs 09:41, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

• Comment Canildo, I've added info on that image. Rossrs, I've toned down the "fanzine", and I've added samples of the song (This is the first time I've ever added a sample, so I'm not sure if I did it right - if I didn't please let me know). And Evil Monkey, I'm not sure where I would find references, as most of the stuff I wrote was from TV/Radio/Magzine interviews that don't have an online counterpart. But I'll be looking for some. OmegaWikipedia 14:38, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
  • References don't need to be online. If stuff is coming from TV shows etc then provide airing date and time, channel etc. Evil Monkey∴Hello 01:26, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Evil Monkey, I can't remember random shows from two years ago, but I do remember that Beyonce has talked about it on her live DVD and the DVD single of the song. I've added them as references. Is that ok now? OmegaWikipedia 11:23, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
  • OmegaWikipedia - the article looks a lot better and I appreciate the way you've responded to the various comments here. When I have a bit more time over the next couple of days, I'll go back over the article and give it a copyedit. You know, with regards to references you can always work backwards. Try doing a Google search on Beyonce or the song. She's got to have about a zillion hits, pick some of the more credible sites and go back through them. Then you should find good quality references that you can cite, plus you'll probably find more info that can be used in the article. Then anything remaining that needs a source, and which you can't find a source for - you can delete, and all you've done is improve the article. Some type of review comments or quotes from critics would be a good addition, and give the article a bit more "authority", so if you try searching on some of the more legitimate music sites such as Rolling Stone, NME, Melody Maker, Billboard etc, you're sure to get some good stuff. That's just a suggestion but once you start sifting through sites like that, it's amazing how much good info you can find, and your reference problem will be solved. Some of these sites also link to magazine articles and interviews etc, once again useful source material. Rossrs 12:23, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Thanks, Rossrs. I was able to find two more sources for the article. I've also followed your suggestion on including comments from critics, and I've added a section detailing their thoughts. Is there anything else that needs attention. OmegaWikipedia 20:05, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Support The critical comments made all the difference - nicely done. I went through the article and copyedited it. I don't consider the changes I've made to be major, but I did delete some minor things that I thought weren't needed, but I also added a couple of points. Well, you can see what I've done in the edit history. Have changed my vote to support. Rossrs 11:49, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment Thanks Rossrs :) OmegaWikipedia 12:34, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
• Strong Support It deserves to be a featured article. Ruennsheng 08:45, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment Thank you Ruennsheng :) OmegaWikipedia 12:34, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose, please add the html links from the text as complete citations the reference section so that a record of who wrote the artcile, what it was called and who published it is available if the site goes down or the page is moved.--nixie 23:28, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose. Besides what nixie said above (see Wikipedia:Footnotes for guidelines on how to do this), a few more things that need to be fixed.
  1. Copyedit for proper terminology and conciseness (eg. "a rap performance by Jay-Z" should be "a guest rap from Jay-Z" or "a guest rapped verse from Jay-Z").

That can be done

• 1. Header is too short for article this long. It should be at least another paragraph long, telling us why this song is notable. Mention the Chi-Lites by name in the header when referring to the sample (which uses the bass and drums as well as the horns); your average reader will not know "Are You My Woman" is a Chi-Lites song.

Well the reason for the song's importance is seen in the first section and the critical response section, but I think I kind of get what you're getting at.

You can take a look at Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles#Headings for more information. --FuriousFreddy 04:06, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

• 1. Do not bold chart positions (unencyclopediaic and POV). This goes for other articles as well.

Have to disagree with this one too. I know you mentioned the other articles, but it is pretty commonplace, and it's not really POV, I think. A #1 should be emphasized just like the entries here who emphasize different Olympic winners in different degrees.

It's POV, because it implies "oh, look! We got a number one hit! Yay!" (which is also unencyclopediaic). It looks, for lack of a better term, "fannish", and is only common among the articles on pop stars written by their fans. Your average Wikipedia user should be able to realize that you can't do any better than a #1 hit.--FuriousFreddy 04:06, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

• 1. Format references in APA format, with author, publisher, year, place of publication, and (where applicable) page. See Wikipedia:Cite sources/example style and Wikipedia:Template messages/Sources of articles/Generic citations

Ok, I'll take a look

• 1. Three samples of one song is overkill. Only one 20 second or less sample of the record should be used.

Disagree here again. LOL Maybe I should stop right now. With all the disagreeing you'll probably end up opposing anyway. If this were something like "Naughty Girl" or "Me, Myself, and I" then I'd agree. But "Crazy In Love" is well known for its rap and its sample usage, so I feel those need a sample too.

I'm surprised the users who push fair use haven't raised an issue about that. It just looks a bit "extra". No one else has said anything, so I'll ease up on this. BTW, so long as these minor issues are improved, I will support the article; it's very good. --FuriousFreddy 04:06, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

• 1. Don't leave elements of the infobox empty. If you don't know the exact day the song was recorded, a year will suffice.

Nothing's blank now.

Be careful about blanking other users' comments. Let them do that; in some cases, it could be seen as vandalism. --FuriousFreddy 04:06, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

• 1. For that matter, avoid using the infobox templete, and use just the code, so that Beyonce and Jay-Z's single chronologies can be listed seperately.

Is the Jay-Z chronology right though? He's also releasing so many singles and I dont remember their exact order.

According to the Jay-Z discography, "Crazy in Love" was preceeded by "La-La-La (Excuse Me Again)" and followed by "Beware of the Boys"

• 1. More pictures (screen captures from the music video, alternate single covers from overseas, a screen capture from a live performance, etc) would help break up the monotony of non-illustrated text for a visitor. At least two more pictures should be added, although I will not oppose the article if no pictures are added.

I believe theres only one single cover, but more pics and live performances can be added.

--FuriousFreddy 01:24, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

In addtion, as per current edits (wow; that was fast)...I don't think music video directors should be listed in the infobox for two reasons:

Hehe, I'm just fast like that :p

1. "Music video directo" is too long to fit in the infobox.
2. "Director" by itself looks odd without any attribution to what the director directed. Leaving it out, or mentioning it in a production credits list of some sort, will suffice

Well, I have to disagree with this. I'd prefer Video Director but apparently some people have issues with two words being in caps next to each other. But I think nowadays the music video director is key to a single, and theres no way it should be left out the single box.

"Video director" should work fine. "Director" makes it look like the music video director directed the song. --FuriousFreddy 04:06, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Also, songwriters should be listed by their official ASCAP or BMI names, not by any stage names or nicknames (this refers solely to Jay-Z here). The article should reflect what it says in the album liner notes (which should also state where the song was recorded, an fact of intrest for inclusion).

I have to disagree with this one too. I thought about this, but I think it'd be best to leave it as Jay-Z. You and I both know who Shawn Carter is and he's probably not the best example, but for lesser known acts who use stage names, I can see people getting confused and wondering if an artist who was on the record had helped with co-writing it or not.

Pipe the link; somebody might learn something new. It's not a big deal, though; the article can live without it. --FuriousFreddy 04:06, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

OmegaWikipedia 02:01, 28 September 2005 (UTC) --FuriousFreddy 01:44, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

• Also, the comment about the song's vidoe being "one of the best of the year" needs attribution. Otherwise, it is POV. Some of the language in the article still needs to be toned down ("outstanding success", more elegant vocal style", and such). The bit about Harrison being hungover the day he wrote the song needs attribution. --FuriousFreddy 11:26, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Support I think it is comprehensive and very detailed that it truly deserves to be a FA. What FuriousFreddy does not realise is that it is not only this song which are bold texted when the song is number one. Other songs like "We Belong Together" by Mariah Carey or any other number one hit songs are bold texted as well. It is not "fannish" as FuriousFreddy says. It is to emphasise the achievement of the artist throughout their chart period, not POV. Other hit songs are like that as well. It is objective and straight to the fact. What else would you expect? The song did reach number one. Furthermore, the article do need the link for evidence that it is correct of that the article has been said. Otherwise, the article itself might get accused for over-exaggeration saying it is too much of a "fansite". So a link to the article will directly tell us that some statements which are too good or bad to be true is correct by providing evidence. Thirdly, we are working on the pictures but we don't need it too much to emphasise the song. I think the article we have right now is sufficent. So, I think FuriousFreddy should realise that this is how the music single article and other popstars articles are like. It is not "fansite" but objective and telling the fact. I think this article is encyclopedic. FuriousFreddy should look at more single articles before making ridiculous statements. Person22 04:27, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
  • "It is to emphasise the achievement of the artist throughout their chart period". That is a textbook example of what POV is, we do not emphasize or place person on a pedestal for recording #1 hits. As I said before, the other singles articles should not be bolding chart positions either. Do not bash comments by other users, especially over something like bolding text on pages. FInally, you can't support an article twice. --FuriousFreddy 03:27, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Object. Too many samples. If you're going to claim fair use, you need to limit it to one sample of 30 seconds/10% of the track or less. --Carnildo 07:14, 28 September 2005 (UTC)