Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Girl Is Mine/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
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 not promoted by SandyGeorgia 06:57, 6 July 2009 [1].

The Girl Is Mine

edit
Nominator(s): Pyrrhus16 18:26, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

I am nominating this for featured article because... despite not being the longest of articles, I believe it meets the FA criteria. Pyrrhus16 18:26, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. Is there any music sheet available? Needs more info on structural composition. brandt 18:11, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I couldn't find any non-watermarked images of the sheet music on the web. I've added a bit on the musical structuring of the song, underneath the recording paragraph. Pyrrhus16 19:42, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:28, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Vague support Not strongly supporting this, as I know nothing about WP:MOSMUSIC and there may be guidelines you've failed to follow of which I'm not aware, but this seems to cover everything that could be said without slipping over the line into fancruft and with no obvious room for improvement that I can see. I think that 'The "irrepressibly silly Paul McCartney"'s breakdown' needs rewording to avoid that awkward double punctuation, though. And this prompted me to listen to TGIM for the first time in months, and I'd forgotten just how creepily weird it is. Just saying. – iridescent 00:15, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for that, I've fixed it now. I agree; it is a pretty strange song. :) Pyrrhus16 11:31, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, 1a, 1b, and MoS issues. Quite a bit more work is needed to get this up to FA quality for a song. There are plenty of general prose and MoS problems, but the explanations of the composition and examination of the music are confusing and incomplete. Example issues:
    • MoS issues spotted. Please check punctuation in quotations per WP:LQ. There are also problems with quotations with quotations.
      Think I've got all the occurences.
    • General problem with overlinking. Don't link common terms such as "plagiarism", "record label", "remix", "cartoons", and many more.
      Done.
    • "The track was written by Jackson as he watched cartoons" This seems highly unnecessary detail for the lead. Later, more confusion ensues as you expound that he was watching cartoons with McCartney, but also that he woke up in the night and sang into a tape recorder? The cartoon bit is unclear and of questionable importance to the article. On the whole, the half-paragraph discussion of the composition process is confusing and incomplete.
      Fixed, I think. It was completed as he watched cartoons, following him recording a rough demo into a recorder.
    • "Despite the public feeling" What does this mean? What public feeling? We shouldn't be forced to read the entire article to discover the meaning of something in the lead. Details, yes—meaning, no.
      Fixed in the above paragraph.
    • Your explanation of how the song uses AABA is... incorrect. "When used to the maximum"? No one is going to follow this. I get the impression you've paraphrased some explanation from the source without fully understanding what the author was discussing. AABA has nothing to do with lyrics.
      Indeed. I reworded the info in this, as I only just found it during the FAC. Any help on this part would be appreciated.
    • I was hoping to see more musical analysis of the song, since at least one of your sources seems to touch on it. This is a concern for comprehensiveness.
      Added info on the musical chords. Pyrrhus16 16:21, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And much more. --Laser brain (talk) 19:55, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • "Listeners were not impressed by 'The Girl Is Mine'": I'm curious as to who exactly "listeners" refers to here; the public? How does one gauge public opinion of a single so soon after it is released?
  • The general public, yes. I'm not too sure how the public's opinion was gauged. Perhaps they wrote to the press and complained, or the press took to the streets and asked the public their thoughts.
  • "Despite some of the public's concerns, 'The Girl Is Mine' achieved success in the music charts." I don't see the connection between the 2 clauses of the sentence.
  • Removed first part.
  • Most of those publications seem to slag off the single, I think branding the reviews as "mixed" might be a little too soft. Further, are any of those quotes from actual contemporary single reviews? If they are from album reviews, or just general descriptions of the song in pieces written years after, make sure you classify them as such. (it is important to give a contrast between contemporary reaction vs. retrospective opinion)
  • Added an explanation in the text.
  • Move the charts to the bottom of the article. (looking rather unsightly where it is right now, in between large paragraphs of text)
  • Done.
  • What is Thriller 25? Shouldn't that section header be in quotes?
  • Done both.
  • Who is Aidin Vaziri?
  • Done.
  • I don't think its necessary to have each line of the remix credits begin with "Remix". Also, since personnel credits are self-referential, those cites (#40 and #41) can go as well.—indopug (talk) 16:34, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done. Thanks for your helpful comments. Pyrrhus16 17:03, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/The_Girl_Is_Mine/archive1&oldid=1138473169"