Wikipedia:Peer review/Candy (Foxy Brown song)/archive2

Candy (Foxy Brown song)[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion is closed.

I would like to put this article through the FAC process sometime in the future (although I do not have any specific time in mind), and I would greatly appreciate any feedback on how to better improve it prior to a nomination. I have successfully worked on two song FACs in the past, but this is still really out of my comfort zone. Thank you in advance! Aoba47 (talk) 05:11, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Moisejp: since they have helped with the previous peer review and I've told them that I'd notify them about the second peer review. Please do not feel pressured to participate. I'll be leaving this up for a while still to get as much feedback as possible, and while FAC is still the goal, I am in no rush to nominate this. Right now, my goal is better improve the article through feedback. Aoba47 (talk) 05:01, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Homeostasis07

Hey, sorry about the delay. Been a weird weekend, and only got a few hours to myself now to review. Here are my thoughts about the article:

Lead

I think the first paragraph could be rewritten to something like:

"Candy" is a song by American rapper Foxy Brown featuring Kelis, released by Def Jam on August 21, 2001 as the third and final single from her third studio album Broken Silence (2001). A dance-pop and R&B track, it was produced by the Neptunes duo Chad Hugo and Pharrell Williams, who co-wrote the song alongside Brown and Juan Manuel Cordova. Brown raps on the verses while Kelis, a frequent collaborator with the Neptunes, performs the hook. The song was recorded in Virginia Beach and mixed in New York City.

Thank you for this suggestion! I am always the worst at writing the lead, probably because I save it for the end and rush through that part somewhat. Your version is head and shoulders above mine, and it motivates me to try and be better with this particular part of Wikipedia writing. Aoba47 (talk) 00:10, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, could you be a bit more specific on how this song was promoted in the music video for "Tables Will Turn"? It's not really clear in how it's currently worded. Maybe something like:

"The song premiered at the album's listening party, and although no official music video was created for "Candy", the song did appear in the music video for subsequent single "Tables Will Turn"." ^ I've not seen the music video for TWT, so how brief was the "Candy" portion? Just a little snippet or basically the whole thing?

Thank you for bringing it up. I agree that the original wording was too vague. Only a small portion of the song is played at the end of the "Tables Will Turn" music video, roughly 30 seconds or so. Please let me know if further clarification is necessary. Aoba47 (talk) 00:10, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Critical reception

Typo at "In 2008, The News-Press' Mark Marymont for said that although Kelis had "sometimes thin, even whiny vocals", she sounded better on duets like "Candy"."

I am not sure how that happened lol. I have fixed this. Aoba47 (talk) 00:10, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think there's another typo in the last paragraph of this section: "In a review of Macy Gray's 2001 album The Id, The Washington Post's Arion Berger said the track "Harry" had had (?) a "sexual boast as bold" as "Candy" ..."

Apparently, the sexual boasts in these songs were so bold that I had to put in two "had"s lol. I have corrected this. Aoba47 (talk) 00:10, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise, I thought this was a finely written and nicely researched article, with little to complain about even at this stage. I hope this review has been helpful, and I look forward to seeing it nominated at FAC soon. Hope you're keeping well. ;) Homeostasis07 (talk/contributions) 19:07, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments and your kind words. I have been fortunate enough to have two song articles successfully pass through the FAC process, but I always feel slightly uncomfortable when it comes to nominating song articles for some reason. Please let me know if you need any help with anything on here. It is always a pleasure to hear from you. Aoba47 (talk) 00:10, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment You may find User:Headbomb/unreliable, as it highlights potentially unreliable sources. For your article, I can see that YouTube and Jezebel are two such sources. HĐ (talk) 11:36, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

YouTube is used as a primary source to discuss a music video so that should be acceptable. I will do further research into Jezebel. That citation is only used once so it would be easy to remove, but I'd like to look further into it first. I personally would not see a reason to consider Jezebel unreliable in this context, since it is not used to support contentious or controversial claims. Thank you for your help! Aoba47 (talk) 16:54, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to update you to let you know that I have removed the Jezebel source since there was already a more reliable source used to cover the same information. Aoba47 (talk) 19:16, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from SG[edit]

I think you can do better with this caption: Kelis (pictured in 2007) received praise for her performance on "Candy". "Received praise" is so generic that it becomes trite. That's all I've got (but you can install this script). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:38, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the comments. I agree that "received praise" has been repeated so often that it does become rather empty. I have revised the image caption to hopefully be more specific and descriptive to this song. Thank you for the script link. I need to sit down and learn how to use scripts because I am quite bad at that for some reason. Aoba47 (talk) 21:40, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SandyGeorgia: Apologies for the ping, but I wanted to keep the conversation here. Do you think that I should archive this peer review? It was opened in early September and is currently the oldest peer review in the "Arts" category. I would not want to divert attention away from newer peer reviews, and this one has already received a fair bit of attention (and thank you again for everyone that has helped here). I would like to nominate this article for a FAC, but I was thinking of waiting until December for that so I am not asking this because I am in a rush for that. Just trying to help the peer review process as much as I can.
@Tom (LT): Apologies for the ping to you as well, but I would be curious on your opinion on this since you are very involved with the peer review process and would have a better understanding of when to archive an older nomination. Thank you to you both and I hope you are both doing well. Aoba47 (talk) 00:21, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Either way seems fine; not sure Tom is around a lot, he seems busy. Your choice! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:31, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. It was just something I was thinking about. I'll keep it open another week, and then close it. Aoba47 (talk) 00:44, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from SatDis[edit]

The article is reading very nicely. I can see that a lot of effort has been put into the prose and the referencing. A few notes:

Should "b-side" be "B-side"? I'm sure it should be upper case.

Revised. You are right. I just think it looks weird, but A-side and B-side both should be capitalized. Aoba47 (talk) 16:33, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you link the first mention of "soundtracks"? Or phrase it as "was often featured on the soundtracks for early 2000s films, including..."? Just a bit more specific.

I linked "soundtracks". Aoba47 (talk) 16:33, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would link like this: Associated Press's, as it's a proper noun, but I think personal preference could be okay here.

I prefer to have "s's", but it is encouraged by MOS:POSS so I have changed it. I do not have a strong feeling about it either way. I just find the repetition of s's to be odd-looking. Aoba47 (talk) 16:33, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Could you link first New York City in lead and prose?

Linked. Aoba47 (talk) 16:33, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I double checked to see if it charted in Australia, and it looks like it didn't.

Thank you for checking. I am not too surprised since the single's US release seemed to be quite limited so that probably impacted its international performance. Aoba47 (talk) 16:33, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Citations are looking fine as well.

Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 16:33, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well done on the article - fantastic that there are critical reviews both positive and negative. I'm sorry that I don't have any more comments, the article is looking good to me. SatDis (talk) 05:48, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments, and there is no need to apologize. You have caught a lot of things that I kept reading over so I greatly appreciate it. I try my best to stay as objective as possible by including both the positive and negative reviews. I am very happy and pleasantly surprised that I found so much coverage for the song, especially when this is what the article looked like before I started working on it. Aoba47 (talk) 16:33, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]