Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Treat Myself/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 12 October 2023 [1].

Treat Myself[edit]

Nominator(s): NØ 14:48, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about Meghan Trainor's third album, Treat Myself. Before she made us look again, there was this commercial disaster. Trainor's label delayed it several times, spanning over a year, and can probably write a book about what not to do when promoting an album. She has stated in interviews that it is her best work. And if you ask me, track 1 on this album is the best song she has released! Thanks a lot to everyone who will take the time to give their feedback here.--NØ 14:48, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Media review (pass)[edit]

The images are licensed appropriately and have alt text (suggest including one for the alternative cover). The audio sample has an appropriate FUR and meets WP:SAMPLE. Pseud 14 (talk) 20:18, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MyCatIsAChonk
  • She conducted the first session - not sure if this is just a music industry term, but I (a classical musician) am reading this as she literally conducted the song; perhaps "ran" or "held" would be better
  • This is a great point and I would have never realized this unless you raised it.
  • She said it was "fun, dance-y stuff with a little funk" and had an '80s and '90s feel" - missing quotation mark before '80s?
  • Dani Blum of Pitchfork described Treat Myself as a combination of several ballads, funk, and "garish shudders of EDM" and wrote - using and in "and wrote" shortly after using and for "and 'Garish...'" is a bit confusing; I think it'd be better as "Dani Blum of Pitchfork described Treat Myself as a combination of several ballads, funk, and "garish shudders of EDM", writing..."
  • Lyrically, it discusses - replace it with "the album" or just the album's name
  • Wl Evil twin in on which Trainor blames her bad decisions during a night out on her "evil twin"
  • Mike Nied of the same website, Lucy Mapstone of The Irish News, and Lauren Alvarez of Forbes thought the album was "worth the wait" - did all three say those exact words? If not, attribute the quote, and abridge the other two to just "critics" or "reviewers"
  • I was surprised too but they did, indeed, all use those words!

MaranoFan, all done, great work as always! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 01:10, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for the swift review, MyCatIsAChonk. Very helpful and all done I think.--NØ 06:50, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support - if you get any time, I have an open FAC and two open FLCs that I'd appreciate comments at- thanks! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:01, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nevermind, I didn't see your comments at season 3 until just now- thank you so much! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:04, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • "Meghan Trainor was placed...." - re-introduce her in the body as "American singer-songwriter Meghan Trainor"
  • "Nied opined Trainor successfully" => "Nied opined that Trainor successfully"
  • That's it, I think - great work as ever!! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:17, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done--NØ 15:31, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GWL[edit]

Came here from PR! As usual, I've put invisible comments to divide my comments based on sections. GeraldWL 08:58, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from GeraldWL 07:46, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
* Per img reviewer's cmts, there should be alt text for alt cover
  • I'm not sure what 2020 Trainor pic serves other than decoration. Even with that said, we already see her face twice in the infobox, with a good headshot in the alt cover, so there's not much value for another pic.
  • This would probably be the TFA image so I would prefer to keep it in. I would also disagree that it is decorative. An image of the article subject from the month of album release seems like a natural fit for inclusion.
  • Refs 69-82 are unarchived, why so?
  • They don't since they are automatically produced by the Album chart template. I believe archives are considered redundant here since the database cited directly is an archive itself.
  • "Trainor worked with producers including Mike Sabath, Tyler Johnson, Ojivolta, and Andrew Wells." Is there a reason the other producers aren't included?
  • Nine producer names would be a bit much for the lead and unlikely to interest the average reader. I have limited it to producers who contributed to multiple tracks.
  • "and others commented" --> "while others commented"
  • "for the second time in December 2016"-- I think adding briefly on when was the first time, would make "for the second time" more sense.
  • By vocal cord surgery, you mean Thyroplasty?
  • No sources use this word so no.
  • "and she wanted to bring Spears, NSYNC and Backstreet Boys-inspired pop songs "back to radio"." Not sure what "back to radio" means? Was she saying she wanted this album to have similar vibes with the songs of these artists?
  • She wanted songs influenced by these artists to be played on the radio again.
  • Link Valentines
  • "Scherzinger's appearance is credited to the Pussycat Dolls"-- should link The Pussycat Dolls and explain what it is in relation to Scher.
  • "the same girl gang hoots and hollers and fluffernutter hooks"-- I'm sure it's not really referring to the peanut butter but there should probably be clarification on the slangs.
  • I introduced a link for girl group and removed fluffernutter altogether since there does not seem to be any obvious way to paraphrase this.
  • The Hear to stay lyrics should prob have a space before the "/"
  • Why does that lyrics separate each line with / but for "Opinion" it's written like a usual sentence?
  • Good catch and should be consistent now.
  • Release looks all good!
  • Since there are only four critics used in Meta, I think it'd be interesting to list who only is considered in their aggregation. Also interesting since you use all the critics in this section.
  • Why not italicize Idolator?
  • The citation style I follow typically sticks to the publications' respective articles when it comes to italicization. The one for Idolator never italicized it.
Thanks for the very insightful review, Gerald Waldo Luis. I hope everything has been addressed.--NØ 15:31, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It seems like it, all my comments seem resolved swimmingly! Happy to support another of your FACs. GeraldWL 07:46, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source review[edit]

  • The citations come from high-quality sources that are appropriate for a music-related article and are well-structured. I have a few comments below, but for the most part, this part of the article seems solid to me. I have also done a spot check and based on the random sources I checked out, the information cited in the article can be found in the actual sources.
  • I hate to do this, but what makes Riff a high-quality source? Not saying it is not, but I would just like to hear your defense of it as it is not a source that I am personally familiar with.
  • There is no need to hate doing this, I appreciate your thoroughness! Riff has an extensive editorial team and is ran by Daniel Willis according to their About page, who has contributed to LA Times, The Atlantic, and several other reputed publications. It has also been recognized with three awards by the San Francisco Press Club and quoted/cited according to ProQuest.
  • Thank you for the explanation. That makes sense to me. Aoba47 (talk) 12:05, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Citation 19 has this title, Meghan Trainor: Treat Myself (Album Review), when the article has this title, Meghan Trainor's Treat Myself Has Us Questioning How Deep Feminism Runs in the Music Industry. The title in the citation should match the title in the article.
  • Citation 36 uses both work and publisher (i.e. People and Yahoo! Entertainment) when other citations, such as Citation 12 only uses one. I would change this citation to match the others and I would double-check any other citations to make sure they are all consistent with one another.
  • I have only included both in citation 36 since it is a People article published by Yahoo! Entertainment. I have been asked to note this in references when a site publishes a different publisher's review during prior source reviews.
  • Thank you for the explanation. Apologies for not looking at the source closer. Aoba47 (talk) 12:05, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Citation 39 does not have an author, but the source has a credited author (Glenn Rowley). Citation 59 has the same issue. The source has a credited author (Taylor Weatherby) not represented in the citation.

Wonderful work on the article. I hope this source review is helpful. Once everything has been addressed, this should pass my source review. I hope you have a great rest of your week! Aoba47 (talk) 17:14, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A pleasure to see you at another one of my nominations, Aoba47, as always. The source review comments should all be addressed!--NØ 11:12, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the kind words! This FAC passes my source review. Best of luck with the FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 12:05, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pseud 14[edit]

  • My only comment, would be in the background's introductory sentence, After a previous incident in the summer of 2015 -- perhaps it would be beneficial to specify that this incident was her suffering vocal cord hemorrhage for some context, which led to her vocal rest (again) the following year?

Other than that, great work here as usual. Pseud 14 (talk) 22:45, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done, Pseud 14. I hope this was an enjoyable read and you are having a great weekend!--NØ 18:54, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@FAC coordinators: FYI the nominator was indefinitely blocked this morning. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:17, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[2]. Serial 11:34, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Tks Mike/SN, as it happens the nom might have the legs for promotion in any case, we'll go over it in due course. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:49, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to address anything you guys want!--NØ 17:31, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers Mike. SN, apologies for reading straight past your brief post on MF's talk page - I have since spotted it. Clearly you have a better memory for these things than me, I assume that I employed a "deal with it and forget it" approach, which was probably not wholly appropriate. Ian, if this needs another review or whatever, let me know. (I remember a few years ago when another nominator went radio silent your letting me address my own review comments and edit the article accordingly. I ended up supporting, who needs nominators?) Gog the Mild (talk) 18:50, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Since the nomination has come this far, I'd hate to see this get archived because of a block. While MF is blocked, I'd be happy to resolve any comments or provide my own review, should the need arise. FrB.TG (talk) 05:54, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
​ I see this is now on urgents. Would it be okay for me to go ahead and make another nomination anyway?--NØ 06:38, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Given the level of support this has attracted plus the source and image review passes yes, that would be ok. In future you would probably get a swifter response by using @FAC coordinators: which pings all of the coordinators. And I note that you started another nomination prior to this response; no great harm done, but having asked my permission it would have been appreciated if you had had the courtesy to wait for my response. Good luck with it in any case. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:13, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Immensely grateful.--NØ 15:20, 11 October 2023 (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/Treat_Myself/archive1&oldid=1179870696"