Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Leah LaBelle/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 promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 18 September 2021 [1].

Leah LaBelle edit

Nominator(s): Aoba47 (talk) 03:20, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about an American singer who first rose to prominence as a finalist on American Idol's third season. Her YouTube covers of R&B and soul music led to work as a backing vocalist and a record deal. Her music career stalled from there, and on January 31, 2018, LaBelle and her boyfriend Rasual Butler died in a car crash in Los Angeles.

I first worked on this article back in 2018, and it received a very helpful GAN review from @100cellsman:. I revisited the article earlier this year, and during a peer review, I received very helpful feedback from @Urve:, @Pseud 14:, and @SNUGGUMS:. This is the first time I have put a biography article through the FAC process so apologies for any obvious mistakes. I would greatly appreciate any suggestions on how to further improve the article. This will be my last FAC for some time (as I will be taking an extended WikiBreak). Thank you in advance and I hope everyone is doing well and staying safe! Aoba47 (talk) 03:20, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from SNUGGUMS edit

Looking pretty good overall. No concerns with the licensing for File:Leah Labelle 2012.png or File:Leah LaBelle at Crocodile Cafe, Seattle, October 2013.jpg, and I see no good reason to doubt how File:JamesAGarfield HS 2.jpg is the uploader's own work. I only have a couple minor issues:

First and foremost, it would be more appropriate to use a comma after "2013" from the note "LaBelle's debut studio album was initially set for a 2012 release, later being delayed to 2013. and was ultimately never released". You otherwise are left with an incomplete sentence that lacks proper capitalization.

That was a very silly mistake on my part. I have added a comma to this part. Aoba47 (talk) 23:31, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Secondly, is it known what role(s) she played in Black Nativity? That would be helpful to add.

Unfortunately, that is not known. I have tried doing a web search as well as a search on Newspapers.com and I could only find that she had some role in Black Nativity but none of the discussions went into further detail on that. Aoba47 (talk) 23:31, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You thankfully don't need to change much here. The image review passes based on my above comments. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 05:13, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SNUGGUMS: Thank you for your comments and your image review. I have revised the article to address your first point, and unfortunately, after doing another search, I could not find further information to answer your second point. I hope you are doing well and having a great week so far! Aoba47 (talk) 23:31, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure, and I now support the nomination :). SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 01:03, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 01:49, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SNUGGUMS: Apologies for the ping. I just wanted to let you know that I have removed one of the images and added in two other images. Aoba47 (talk) 04:19, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Following your change, I'll assume good faith that File:Pat Wright 01.jpg or File:Keri Hilson 2009-04-10 Adam-Bielawski.jpg are indeed the own work of their respective uploaders when there's no evidence to the contrary. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 04:30, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for checking this! Aoba47 (talk) 04:53, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from Pseud14 edit

Resolved comments from Pseud 14 (talk) 13:16, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

* and a posthumous extended play (EP) and other artists featured her on their songs -- too many follow-ons, full stop after EP. Since info of her as featured artists appear on the discography table.

I have done as you requested. I agree with you completely on this, and it was something that I kept going back to prior to this nomination. Her features are not as notable as her sampler album and extended play so those should really get the focus anyway. Aoba47 (talk) 03:45, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Toronto, Canada-- Toronto, Ontario (lead and early life)

Revised. Thank you for the note. I am not super familiar with Canada so I was not fully aware of how to represent this information. It makes sense given that American cities are further represented by their state and not the country. Aoba47 (talk) 03:45, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

“pursuing music as a career “ and “pursue music as a career” -- consider revising either to make it less repetitive or avoid confusion

I have removed the second instance as it was not entirely true anyway. She was still pursuing a music career while in college (and I'm curious on how she viewed her actual classwork and getting a college degree, but I doubt I will find an answer about either of those things). I can understand how this was confusing so thank you for bringing this point up. It was just something I kept reading over if I am being completely honest. Aoba47 (talk) 03:54, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

LaBelle recorded music for YouTube -- reword, perhaps she released her music through her YouTube channel and not “for YouTube”

Fair point. I hope that it is okay that I used your wording. Aoba47 (talk) 03:54, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Her mother said although Heard enjoyed working with LaBelle, "the contract they were offering was too binding -- I think this line is conflicting, perhaps shorten it or reword.

Very good catch. Thank you for pointing this out. I removed the beginning part as it is not particularly relevant and the quote is more important to focus on anyway. Aoba47 (talk) 03:56, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

and attracted attention for her covers -- gained recognition

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 03:49, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The song had received over 500,000 views as of October 16, 2012 -- don’t think inclusion of the views accumulated is necessary.

Removed. I originally added this information to further represent her popularity, but this view count is very, very low by today's standards anyway and really does not add much for the reader. Aoba47 (talk) 03:49, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

LaBelle was his backing vocalist, and she performed duets with him -- "she performed duets with him", since it was previously mentioned that she did backing vocals to Eric Benet,

I think it is somewhat notable that LaBelle performed duets with Benet. She was one of his backing vocalists, but the fact that she was given the space and time to step more so into the spotlight and sing duets seems interesting to me. Aoba47 (talk) 03:58, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

in a partnership with Pharrell Williams' label I Am Other and Jermaine Dupri's label So So Def Recordings. - you can omit both mention of "labels"

Removed. Aoba47 (talk) 03:50, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's all I have on a first pass. Great work! Pseud 14 (talk) 00:38, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Pseud 14: Thank you for your review. I greatly appreciate your comments, and you have help to improve the article immensely. I have addressed all of them, but one which I left a comment to hopefully explain my perspective. I hope you are having a great week so far! Aoba47 (talk) 03:59, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to support this nomination. I do have an open FLC and would always appreciate feedback when you have time to spare. Pseud 14 (talk) 13:16, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the support. I will definitely review your FLC sometime in the next couple of days. Have a great rest of your week! Aoba47 (talk) 18:20, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Damian Vo edit

I only have a few minor comments:

I believe the author of the AllMusic review for American Idol Season 3: Greatest Soul Classics is Heather Phares. Since her name is already mentioned in the author parameter, perhaps you could replace the current title with the name of the compilation album.

Yikes, Heater was a very silly mistake on my part. I agree that it is better to point out the album title as it would be better indication of the article. Aoba47 (talk) 18:23, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The citation for Tophit suggests that the reader can only found her chart history by manually searching for her name on the site (maybe you cited this site before its current display). I would suggest either directing to her artist page or simply changing the format of the current source to match with the Billboard ones (since "Lolita" is her only entry). The site is archivable too!

Thank you for the options! I used the artist page since it seemed like the simplest and clearest option. I also archived the source to avoid any future issues. Aoba47 (talk) 18:27, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unlink The Seattle Times in the "Death and aftermath" section as it is linked in a previous section.

Unlinked. Thank you for pointing this one out. I am not sure how I missed it. Aoba47 (talk) 18:23, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Great work overall! Damian Vo (talk) 07:36, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Damian Vo: Thank you for catching my very silly mistakes. I greatly appreciate your help and your kind words. Let me know if anything else in the article could be improved. I hope you are doing well and staying safe! Aoba47 (talk) 18:29, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for addressing everything. I can support this nomination. I first heard Leah's music 2-3 years ago upon reading your GAs and found "Sexify" and "Lolita" extremely addictive (classic Pharrell). Her vocals had so much potential, and I love her friendship with JoJo too! Your string of quality articles really did her justice. Damian Vo (talk) 19:13, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the support and your kind words. I really enjoy both "Sexify" and "Lolita" as they are a lot of fun and the production is top-notch. One of these days, I will revisit and revise those articles. You can really tell that JoJo was close to Leah, and that is super sweet to see. I am very proud of my work in this article and very appreciative of all the help that I have received along the way. Aoba47 (talk) 22:05, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image review edit

The images are all hosted on Commons under acceptable licenses and do add to the article with good captions. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 02:52, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 03:01, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Moise edit

Lead: "LaBelle and her boyfriend Rasual Butler[a] died". Do you need the [a] note in the lead? I would have thought in the main text was enough. Moisejp (talk) 03:35, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There have been some instances in the past where editors, mostly IP users, have edited the lead to say that Butler and LaBelle were married since the coverage at the time of their deaths referred to them as such. However, this is very likely overkill on my part and it does look odd to only have a single note in the lead anyway. I have removed it. Aoba47 (talk) 03:49, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Minor suggestion to remove wiki-link for Bulgarian, because it feels excessive with one also for Bulgaria in the same sentence.

Unlinked. You are correct that it is excessive. Aoba47 (talk) 04:07, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe replace the pic of Garfield high school to something else that seems more relevant to her career? Moisejp (talk) 03:41, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have added an image of Pat Wright, who was LaBelle's mentor for five years. I agree that the high school picture was less than ideal. Aoba47 (talk) 04:07, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"She did not perform on the American Idols Live! Tour 2004 since it was restricted to the top ten finalists from the third season." Consider removing?

Removed. It is not particularly important or really about LaBelle anyway. Aoba47 (talk) 04:07, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Several phrases wiki-linked in both the text and closely after in the table, including Whitney Houston, Paula Abdul, the Supremes, and two song titles. Moisejp (talk) 03:49, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed those links. I was uncertain if the table and prose were supposed to be treated separately or not, but it does seem excessive now that I look at it again. Aoba47 (talk) 04:07, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what this means, doesn't seem clear enough: "In a 2018 Billboard article, Heard attributed the end of their working relationship to "the business side of the industry"." Moisejp (talk) 03:56, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point. I have revised it, but I would be more than happy to look at it again. This is the sentence from the citation if that is helpful: Heard blames “the business side of the industry” for him and LaBelle ultimately parting ways. He is very vague on this, but I thought it was still worth noting in the article. Apologies for responding to your comments right away and I will wait until you have posted everything so I do not accidentally override your edits or cause any annoying edit conflicts. Thank you for the review so far. I greatly appreciate it! Aoba47 (talk) 04:12, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"the five-track sampler album". If it's only five tracks, can it be called an album? As you may agree, albums have almost always at least 8 tracks; in my lifetime I feel like I've seen a few with fewer, but only when some of the songs are especially long, like Wish You Were Here (Pink Floyd album). If in doubt you could maybe say sampler release. Moisejp (talk) 03:17, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Or even just a "sampler" by itself, maybe? Moisejp (talk) 03:43, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That is a good point and I agree with you. I went with "sampler" by itself as this terminology has been used by Billboard and Deadline Hollywood. I have seen "album sampler" used by Rap-Up, but I think "sampler" by itself is more concise while still being descriptive enough to be understood by readers (even more so with the link to the sampler album article). I think this change in terminology actually helps to clarify other points about this, like why it was distributed to only record companies and was not a public release. Maybe it's just me, but I find samplers to be such an odd yet interesting format, but maybe that's because I am not really that familiar with it. Aoba47 (talk) 04:17, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"LaBelle said the sampler represented her debut album's sound". First of all, is there any word that you can use instead of "represented"? It doesn't seem as clear to me as would be ideal. Maybe something like "resembled", that's just one idea. But a bigger issue is I got confused here because the info about the album not being released is in a footnote, which I initially missed. I suggest bringing it all out into the main text. Also, it's hinted later in the article that the reason the album wasn't release was due to the lack of success of her singles? If that reason (or another reason) is stated explicitly in your sources, it'd be great if that could be brought to the fore in this section. Moisejp (talk) 04:57, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Revised. I have revised the part you mentioned as it was not entirely accurate. Apologies for that mistake and thank you for bringing it to my attention. Heard said the single's lack of success led to LaBelle feeling trapped and giving up hope on her music career. He did not explicitly tie this to the album. I looked back over the sources, and unfortunately, none of them provide an explanation for why the album was not released (or even speculate on it as they just mentioned it did not happen). I would believe the singles' lack of success would be a factor, but that is just speculation on my part and there could have been other issues, like things within the labels. I hope that clears it up, but let me know if you have any further questions. Thank you for bringing this up as it helped to improve the article a lot. Aoba47 (talk) 17:12, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"LaBelle was also a dancer in the 24-hour music video for Williams' 2013 single "Happy"." Maybe clarify what the 24-hour video was... was there more than one video, and if one of them really lasted 24 hours, how is this so? Moisejp (talk) 05:17, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Williams in fact released a video for this song that lasted 24 hours (and I am more impressed by the technical aspects of this than the actual content). I have added a note to this to hopefully further clarify this point. I have also added in the note the time stamp for LaBelle's appearance as I think that would be the most helpful for readers who want to see her part without feeling like they have to sit through an hour of something just to find her. Aoba47 (talk) 19:14, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Struck me as possibly too much detail in "Death and aftermath", especially in the second paragraph, maybe also in the first. But in truth I haven't really paid attention to how much detail is normal in the "Death" section of biographical articles. If you feel it's a good amount of detail, or it's not excessive compared with similar sections in other articles, that's fine. Moisejp (talk) 05:24, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That is a good point. I am very inexperienced with working biography articles so I am not really aware of what would count as excessive or not for this kind of section. I think most of the current information is relevant. I think the autopsy reports provide more insight about the accident and I believe putting in information about the memorial and separate service is also relevant. I have removed the bit about the obituary though as the exact date it was published and the newspaper do not need to be directly stated in the prose as it is already being used as a citation in this article. Plus, I think it would be more odd/noteworthy if someone did not get an obituary. Please let me know if you have any further questions about this. Aoba47 (talk) 19:14, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Struck me as possibly too much detail in "Death and aftermath", especially in the second paragraph, maybe also in the first. But in truth I haven't really paid attention to how much detail is normal in the "Death" section of biographical articles. If you feel it's a good amount of detail, or it's not excessive compared with similar sections in other articles, that's fine. Moisejp (talk) 05:24, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"number 264 on the official Tophit airplay chart". Mention this is a Russian chart? I know there's a wiki-link, but I assumed it was an ultra-obscure American chart until I got to the Discography section (in retrospect, I'm not sure why I assumed that, but I did).

That is a fair point. I have never heard of it before editing on Wikipedia so I would not be surprised if other readers are equally as unfamiliar. I have edited this part. Aoba47 (talk) 17:18, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think those are all my comments for now. I may do another read-through after you have addressed these. Moisejp (talk) 05:29, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Moisejp: Thank you for your comments. I believe that I have addressed everything, but please let me know if I have overlooked anything or if anything needs further revision and clarification. Have a great rest of your day! Aoba47 (talk) 19:15, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for addressing everything. I will fit in another read-through in the next couple days when my noggin is feeling sharp. Moisejp (talk) 02:05, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. This FAC has only been active for about a week now so there is no reason to rush. Aoba47 (talk) 02:11, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Second read-through:

"During a 2012 Seventeen interview, LaBelle said she had prioritized working in a recording studio over creating YouTube videos." You may or may not agree, but this sentence doesn't seem very meaningful as is, especially when juxtaposed with the sentence that follows it. Are there more details that can be added to flesh out the "prioritized working in a recording studio" statement—any extra context, etc.? Or if not, possibly consider removing it? Moisejp (talk) 16:06, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed that sentence per your suggestion. I originally put in this sentence to clarify that LaBelle was still focused on a music career and had not transitioned into being YouTuber, although upon further reflection, that clarification seems unnecessary and I can see your point. Aoba47 (talk) 17:02, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pat Wright was a mentor, Keri Hilson was a mentor, then we get to the Dupri and Williams part that says, "They acted as her mentors." With so many previously mentioned mentors, consider tweaking this sentence to acknowledge that this hasn't been the first mention of mentors. Moisejp (talk) 17:11, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like a good idea to me. I can see how this is repetitive, particularly given how Wright and Hilson are highlighted in images. Do you have any recommendations on how to revise the Dupri/Williams sentence? I had often revisited this sentence because it sounded off to me anyway, but for whatever reason, I could not think of a good revision. It might be because I have looked at it for a while now so it is hard to get the appropriate distance. Thank you in advance! Aoba47 (talk) 17:19, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The best I can come up with off the top of my head is "Like Wright and Hilson had before, they acted as mentors for LaBelle." What do you think? If it's no good, I could try to think of something else. Moisejp (talk) 17:32, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I like that version better. I have added it to the article. Aoba47 (talk) 19:06, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You might have noticed, I did something similar in the article I'm working on: "Like Frank Black, members of Vampire Weekend have expressed their high regard for Springsteen's composition". Moisejp (talk) 19:37, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think it looks good there too. Aoba47 (talk) 20:01, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"The non-album single, "Lolita", was released in May 2013,[39] and a digital extended play (EP) of electro house remixes and instrumentals was made available a month earlier." I understand these were remixes/instrumentals of "Lolita"—maybe add this for extra clarity: "remixes and instrumentals of the song"? But the bigger issue is you describe this as a (digital) EP but will any readers be confused that it's not mentioned among the EPs in the lead or Discography section? One idea might be to not call it an EP but rather something like "a digital set of remixes and instrumentals of the song". Moisejp (talk) 00:29, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That is a good point. I have used your suggestion. For some reason, I just never thought about including this in the discography section. I think that was because it is fairly standard for singles to be promoted with remixes and those are not included in the artist's discography section. I think your suggestion would avoid any confusion, but let me know if anything else can be done to improve this part further. Aoba47 (talk) 01:05, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Based on someone else's comment you removed mention that certain producers had "donated" songs, but would it be worthwhile to mention there was some kind of involvement by them? I actually preferred the version with donated, because it seemed clear to me. The current version says Heard was interested in releasing music he recorded with her, but did he ultimately (was he among the musicians/singers on the songs by the four producers)? If he wasn't, the current version is especially misleading, because it suggests he was. But even if he was, I think the producers' involvement in assembling songs for the EP is an important element that is now missing. Moisejp (talk) 00:50, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the "donated" sentence back in for further clarification and to avoid any confusion. He was not one of the producers that donated music for the EP. Heard talked about his collaborations with LaBelle in a 2018 Billboard interview. It seems like he used to work with her in the mid-2000s, but he did not work with her after that and only saw more socially like at the Grammys. Let me know if further clarification on this would be helpful. Aoba47 (talk) 01:01, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Those are all my comments. Moisejp (talk) 00:54, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. Support on prose.

Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 01:42, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Quick comment from Sdkb edit

I think the lead should include specifically that she died in a drunk driving crash, not just that she died in a crash. It would only take a few extra words, and it's an important (albeit unflattering) piece of context for an important part of her biography that's given due weight in the body.

I'm pleased to see that the article uses the direct and neutral term "car crash", rather than the euphemistic "car accident", which inappropriately characterizes collisions as happenstance and raises neutrality concerns. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 20:18, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Sdkb: Thank you for the comment. I agree "car crash" is better than "car accident". I am uncertain about calling it a "drunk driving crash" though. Yes, Butler's autopsy did show that he had an elevated blood alcohol level, but I am hesitant to use "drunk driving crash" as I have not seen this reported in sources and I would rather not put in that kind of information if it was not explicitly stated in a source. I have seen sources call it a single-car accident so that might be a helpful to clarify. Aoba47 (talk) 22:51, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments/source review Support from PMC edit

Mostly going to look over the sources and footnotes since other commenters above have covered the prose and the images.

Note A - Not sure that it's necessary to have the detail about her name in a footnote at the beginning. I looked at other high-quality articles for performers with shortened stage names (Madonna, Beyonce, Ariana Grande for example) and none of them had anything like that. Not a hill I'll die on if you feel it should stay where it is, but that detail could possibly be moved to the main text, maybe in paragraph 3 where she auditions for AI.

Removed. To be honest though, this is case is different than the three you have mentioned. Madonna and Beyonce are mostly known by their first names and Ariana Grande is an example of a performer changing their last name via marriage but retaining their more well-known stage name. In LaBelle's case, she used her middle name as her last name, which is different than those three instances, and I thought it was worth pointing out in case there was any confusion. I have still removed the citation, but I just wanted to provide my explanation for its inclusion in the first place. Aoba47 (talk) 22:55, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Refs 5 - I'm leery of using a subject's own website for this kind of detail, it's both unverifiable and a little fluffy. Is there no secondary coverage that mentions this?

I disagree, but I would rather not cause a fuss over this and I have removed the citation. Aoba47 (talk) 23:43, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 7 - what makes The Boombox a high-quality reliable source?

I think it is important to establish that this citation is an interview with LaBelle and her answers are used to support the information in the article. The site used to be owned by AOL before being acquired by Townsquare Media. Aoba47 (talk) 00:09, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed several instances of this source from the article, except for one instance in which she talks about what her debut album would sound like as I think that is a good quote. Aoba47 (talk) 02:11, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To further support the site's notability, WP:RSMUSIC lists it as a generally reliable source. Aoba47 (talk) 02:30, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect, good to go - just have to ask since it's a source review. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:36, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 8 - since this is a book, is there a reason there's no page number?

I accessed this source through Google Books, and unfortunately, there are not any page numbers in this version. Aoba47 (talk) 22:57, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunate but understandable. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:36, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 23 and 31 - primary sources where there is already a secondary RS cited, I don't think they're necessary

I disagree as they are both used to add information not present in the secondary RS. The YouTube citation is used to support when she started her channel, and the sampler citation is used to support the title, which is not explicitly referenced in the secondary RS. Aoba47 (talk) 23:30, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense, no problem. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:36, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 24/26 - what makes Fuse.tv a high-quality reliable source?

The article was written by Nicole James who's written for multiple reliable sources such as Rolling Stone, Elle, Medium, and MTV News. Fuse was a fairly popular music television network and the site was discussed in Billboard, several times in fact. Aoba47 (talk) 00:30, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, I have removed Fuse.tv as the information I are using this for was already supported by other citations. Aoba47 (talk) 02:08, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, that's fine ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:36, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note B - this could probably be integrated into the text

I have integrated the note into the prose. Aoba47 (talk) 23:04, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 38 - what makes Rap-Up a high-quality reliable source? In particular the articles cited don't appear to me to be firm release date announcements, just speculation.

I have qualified this in the prose with reportedly. According my research, an exact date for the album's release was never formally established or announced. Rap-Up has been cited in several sources, including The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, CNN, The New York Times, and MTV News. Aoba47 (talk) 00:02, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, works for me. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:36, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note C - this could probably be trimmed and integrated into the text; anyone who wants full details on the "Happy" video can go to the song's article

I have integrated the note into the prose and removed unnecessary details. Aoba47 (talk) 23:01, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 56/57 - I have not been able to find any credits that specifically say LaBelle was featured on "Freq". Ref 57 doesn't mention her at all, and the album credits on AllMusic and Discogs just list her as "vocals". Same with this article.

The Billboard citation was used to support that "Freq" is a hidden track on the album. I could not find a direct source that tied LaBelle to "Freq", but that is not too surprising since it is a hidden track and those rarely get coverage of any sort. Would you recommend that I just delete this part entirely? In one of the article's earlier drafts, I had a more generic sentence that said she contributed vocals to the album and I used AllMusic to support this. Would that be preferable? Aoba47 (talk) 23:26, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Musicnotes.com mentions LaBelle and JoJo as "additional performers". Would that source be appropriate? The site says that publishing is administered by EMI Music Publishing. A review by The Boombox (here) also directly links her to the song. Aoba47 (talk) 02:31, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Given that we've established that The Boombox is an RS, I'd say we should cite that and we're good to go. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:36, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note D - if confusion is liable to occur given what the sources said at the time, I think this could be integrated into the text, something like "Reports at the time of the incident referred to Butler as LaBelle's husband, but her obituaries referred to him as her boyfriend."

Confusion about this point has occurred in the past. I can understand since the coverage right after the accident said they were married. I have incorporated the information into the prose, but I am not sure exactly where to put it without reading it like it was awkwardly shoehorned in there. Aoba47 (talk) 23:14, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you really hate it being in the text and want to turn it back into a footnote, I won't oppose a well-written article over that. I just think it's better to have stuff in-text where possible (I recognize my own hypocrisy here given that Islands has a single explanatory footnote). ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:36, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are right that it fits much better in the prose. I do not hate it in the prose so I am sorry that was the impression I was giving off with that. Aoba47 (talk)

Oh no, I'm sorry, I wasn't trying to imply you'd said anything bad, you have nothing to apologize for. I just figured I'd say that it's not something I'd oppose for if you didn't want it to be like that, and I have a somewhat flippant/casual way of speaking that doesn't always come off right in text. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 03:03, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are good too! I'm the worst when it comes into reading tone through messages lol. Aoba47 (talk) 03:07, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 64 - what makes BroadwayWorld a high-quality reliable source?

The site has evidence of editorial oversight (here). The site has been cited in The New York Times twice (1 and 2). The Los Angeles Times referred to it as an "indispensable resource" (here). It also been cited by Business Insider and The Des Moines Register and The Washington Post. Aoba47 (talk) 23:53, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect, works for me. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:36, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Under "Death and Aftermath", in para 2, Her mother provided a $10,000 scholarship... and in para 3, Proceeds from the EP were donated to yearly scholarships. Can you clarify that the EP funds went to provide for additional scholarships aside from the one mom donated? On a casual skim it could be confusing (I had to double check the source).

Thank you for catching this. I have revised it. Aoba47 (talk) 23:15, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:36, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The five songs were donated by their producers - it's not entirely clear what this means. Did they donate their production time? Did they sign their rights to the songs away?

From my understanding, these five songs were recorded sometime before her death. I would not be surprised if the producers owned the songs and they decided to grant permission for their release on an EP rather than holding on to them and having them re-recorded by another artist or just sitting on them. How would you recommend that I revise this so the meaning is clearer? Aoba47 (talk) 23:17, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I decided to remove this sentence completely as upon further reflection, it is not really necessary. It can be safely assumed that whenever songs released, it is done with the consent of those involved with the writing and recording so this is not a particularly unique case. Also, I do not think it is really necessary to include the names of these particular producers. Aoba47 (talk) 03:29, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, no problem. I had no issues with the inclusion (and if you want to revert I support that) I just wasn't precisely sure what was meant. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:36, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The rest of the sources look fine by me - a mix of acceptable primary sources, clearly reliable newspapers and news sites, and some books. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:47, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review. I will start addressing your comments momentarily. Aoba47 (talk) 22:47, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Premeditated Chaos: I believe that I have addressed all of your comments. I have asked questions about two of your points for further clarification. Please let me know if there is anything else I can do. Have a great rest of your day/night. Aoba47 (talk) 00:32, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Aoba, the changes look good to me and I'm satisfied with your rationales for the sources. Once you have the citation for Freq in there, I'm good to support. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:36, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review! I greatly appreciate it. I have added in the citation for "Freq". If there is anything else I can do to improve the article, I would be more than happy to do so. I hope you are having a great week so far and stay safe out there! Aoba47 (talk) 03:11, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, looks good to me. Upgraded to support - have a good one! :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 03:14, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 03:25, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from TheDoctorWho edit

First off, this article seems exceptionally well written, great job on the work you've put into it! Secondly, I think with the above reviews most things have definitely been addressed already but just a few points that I think could be addressed:

In the American Idol table it may be useful to link wildcard directly to the Semi-finals section where information on the wildcard is located, with the current link I have to scroll through four other subsections before getting to the information that's linked.

Thank you for checking this. I agree with your suggestion as it would hopefully avoid any potential confusion as it is less than ideal to have a reader forced to look for this information. Aoba47 (talk) 02:14, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the Record contract section there's a part that reads In the fall, she was the opening act for JoJo's The Agápē Tour, per MOS:SEASON I think a month would be more preferred here.

That is a good point. I agree with the MOS stance on this as seasons can be very ambiguous. I have added the month that the tour took place (which was only in October anyway). Aoba47 (talk) 02:21, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the Death and aftermath section the time of 2:25 AM (PT) is listed, the time should follow MOS:TIME (specifically a lowercase am or a.m.), since it's the first and only time it's mentioned I personally feel that it wouldn't hurt to go ahead and spell out Pacific Time Zone instead of using the abbreviation (see examples at MOS:TIMEZONE).

Revised. I agree that it is best to spell out the time zone, especially since this is the only instance it is mentioned in the article. Thank you for including the MOS links as I was not aware of these points, and they make sense to me. Aoba47 (talk) 02:21, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the Sampler and Extended play subsections of the Discography the track listing is hidden by default. I could be wrong but I think these should be shown upon page listing for accessibility reasons (MOS:HIDE).

Revised. I agree that it is best to keep the information as accessible as possible to readers. I had collapsed the track listings as I was uncertain if it would take up too much space, but since they are both relatively short (i.e. five songs), I have changed my perspective on this point. Aoba47 (talk) 02:24, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I hope these comments are useful for you, as I said I know it's not much but given the extensive reviews above the article has already improved significantly. TheDoctorWho (talk) 01:58, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@TheDoctorWho: Thank you for the kind words. I am very grateful for all the help I have received during this FAC (and during the peer review) as the reviewers have helped to improve the article significantly. You have also helped a lot. You have raised very valuable points, and I greatly appreciate the MOS links as it is something that I should read through more thoroughly in the future. Please let me know if there is anything else I can do to improve the article. Thank you for your review! I hope you are having a great end to your weekend/start to your week! Aoba47 (talk) 02:26, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

With these things fixed that'd be it for me, I gave the article another look over and I think it looks good so it has my support. Good luck on any further reviews and I hope you also have a good week! TheDoctorWho (talk) 05:19, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 05:57, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Status update edit

@FAC coordinators: Apologies for the ping. I just wanted to get a status update for this nomination. Thank you for your time, and have a great weekend! Aoba47 (talk) 01:46, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, 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) 05:01, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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