Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/E.T. (song)/archive1

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 archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 22:46, 16 July 2017 [1].

E.T. (song) edit

Nominator(s): MagicatthemovieS (talk) 16:22, 16 July 2017 (UTC)MagicatthemovieS[reply]

This article is about Katy Perry and Kanye West's alien-themed smash hit "E.T." MagicatthemovieS (talk) 16:22, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Aoba47

Just say “from” instead of “taken from”
I do not believe that the phrase “studio album” needs to be linked.
In the infobox, you have two links for Ammo (under his real name and stage name). Be consistent with one and do not link the same person twice in the infobox. Same applies to Dr. Luke.
Instead of “one version” in the lead’s first paragraph, I would say something along the lines of the “official remix” or something to be more specific.
I would remove the quote from the end of the lead’s first paragraph and paraphrase; the quote should already be in the body of the article, and it is odd to just have one quote/reference in the lead so I would avoid it.
Please link Billboard in the last sentence of the lead’s second paragraph. Make sure it is linked in the first mention in the body of the article as well.
Please specify in the lead that the music video was for the remix of the song rather than the original album version.
Include information on the critical reception of the song in the lead.
Link music critic to music criticism
Please use Katy Perry’s full name on the first mention in the body of the article, as it is treated separately from the lead.
The following sentence could be strengthed (However, after hearing it, Perry chose to work with the track.) as the phrase “work with the track” seems a little odd to me.
The quote at the end of the first paragraph of the “Background and release” section is rather long. I would suggest paraphrasing some of it and only using part of the quote, or just turning it into a block quote.
In the first sentence of the second paragraph of the same section, I am not certain about the phrasing “the solo version of the song”. I would just say the song was released as this phrasing suggests that the solo version was an alternative version to something else when it is in fact the original. Also, at this point in the body of the article, the remix/single version has not been brought up so it can be a little confusing.
Link Teenage Dream and add the release date on its first mention in the body of the article.
”Los Angeles Times” should be “The Los Angeles Times”.
I would add clear topic sentences for the paragraphs in the “Critical reception” section.
I would break up the second paragraph of the “Critical reception” section into two, with one focusing on criticism of the song, and the other on criticism of West’s verse.
I think you need a stronger source to support that this is Perry’s fifth number one single other than pointing to the chart where E.T. is number one. Same goes for saying that this is West’s fourth number one single. You could cite information from the artist’s profile page on the Billboard website for this.
The following links are dead according to this: 52, 37, 15, 51, 114, 115, 116, 118, 120, 119, 124, 117, 60, 64, and 19.
According to this, you are not a major editor of the page. Have you checked with any of the other more involved contributors about putting this up for FAC? This is directly from the instructions for the FAC process: Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article before nominating it.
In the “Chart performance” section, there seems to a lot of attention of the Billboard charts (the first, third, and fourth paragraphs). Is that too much? It seems like it is giving that chart undue weight to me.
I am not certain if the music video image is necessary. If you want to support its inclusion, tie it into critical commentary more clearly. Otherwise, the image just appears to be there for decoration and can be eliminated without losing anything from the actual article.
In the first sentence of the “Reception” subsection in the “Music video” section, I would say that this “received mostly positive reviews” as there were some negative critiques.
The “Live performances and cover versions” does not mention the performances on the Prismatic World Tour.
Were there any reviews of the covers of E.T. by Yellowcard or VersaEmerge?
In the “Credits and personnel” section, please include info on the management and recording locations
Put the Certifications table into its own section titled “Certifications”.
Please fix the Metrolyrics links in the “External links” section as they do not lead to the lyrics for the song.

While there has been a lot of great work put into this article, I feel that this is a premature nomination as I have noticed all of these points during a relatively quick run-through of the article. Once my comments are addressed, I will go through it again more in-depth. Aoba47 (talk) 17:30, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This drive-by nomination is inappropriate when nominator didn't even consult the major contributors (namely myself and (CA)Giacobbe) in advance. It's definitely not ready for FA at the moment. Snuggums (talk / edits) 20:31, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment. I agree that it is not ready for FAC at the moment, and I would recommend that this FAC be withdrawn. Aoba47 (talk) 20:44, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 22:46, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.