Jump to content

Talk:Leave the Door Open

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleLeave the Door Open has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 22, 2022Good article nomineeNot listed
November 21, 2022Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on December 16, 2022.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the bridge in the song "Leave the Door Open" almost split the band Silk Sonic apart?
Current status: Good article

Requested move 24 November 2021

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved (closed by non-admin page mover) BegbertBiggs (talk) 22:44, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]


– I believe the Silk Sonic song is far and away the primary topic here, with the only other entries on the disambiguation page being a redirect, and an album that should probably also be a redirect. Page views support [the song as the primary topic], with 37,967 views compared to the disambiguation page's 268. I feel a disambiguation page at the longer name is most beneficial here. Sean Stephens (talk) 11:55, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Leave the Door Open/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Mike Christie (talk · contribs) 10:18, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]


I'll review this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:18, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The media files are appropriately tagged. Earwig shows no issues.

  • Do we really need the sample? There are already two fair use images in the article; there's not an absolute prohibition on three fair use media files, but you need to have a strong reason, and I don't see anything in the article that requires the audio file in order for the reader to understand the text.
I can re-write its description. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 12:48, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Spotchecks:

  • FN 18 cites 'Charlie Harding from Vulture said "Leave the Door Open" evokes "1970s Philadelphia soul" and despite being "serious musically", it is "lighthearted, lyrically." He found it nostalgic but "sound[ing] contemporary" due to Paak's vocal flow. American singer-songwriter Tayla Parx thought that its modernity stems from the "conversational" lyrics and Paak's "personality" and "silliness". Harding pointed out that its modern approach can be heard at the end of Paak's first verse, to which Parx responded "You can hear [the early influences] in his voice, but those cadences are still very contemporary".' A couple of issues here -- being serious is not the same as taking itself seriously; that's not a verification failure, just a suggestion to reword. And Parx says "silly", not "silliness", so again that needs a little rewording.
    Not sure what do you mean with the serious part, it is taken from a quote. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 12:48, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I had another look, and I think I was reading a nuance into the language that the source didn't intend. If you think I'm a fool, you might still say I take myself seriously, but you wouldn't call me a serious person. The quote is ungrammatical anyway which is what caught my attention. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:15, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Then its their problem as writers, not mine. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 22:51, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • FN 77 cites 'In the week of March 29, 2021, "Leave the Door Open" reached the top ten of Radio Songs chart in its third week, becoming the fastest song to do so since Justin Bieber's "Yummy" (2020) took only two weeks to reach the top ten. The single tied with Mars's "24K Magic" (2016) and "Finesse" (2018) featuring Cardi B for fastest rise to the top ten.' Again this is verified but I would suggest making it "his fastest rise to the top ten" at the end since otherwise a reader might think this refers to songs by others.
 Done
  • FN 140 cites "At the same time, fans danced, sang along, and held up signs as Mars and Paak serenaded them helped by background vocalists." The source says "the two serenaded them with the help of some backup singers. As Silk Sonic performed their hit, fans behind danced while holding up signs." This doesn't say the fans sang along, and without that the rest is too closely paraphrased.
I fixed and I take suggestions here. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 12:51, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Normally with one verification failure out of three I would be doing more spotchecks, but there are so many quotes in the article that it's very difficult to find prose to check that is not simply a quote. There's too much quoting, in fact, and I think this needs to be addressed next. It's normal to quote several sources in the reception section, because you're illustrating opinions, but there should be much less reason to do so in the composion and background sections. Even in the reception section there's too much quoting -- I'm not asking for a FAC level of prose, but this is little more than a listing of quotes. And I think the accolades section contains a good deal of material that probably should be in the critical reception section, if we keep it at all. Wouldn't a reader prefer to read a sentence like '"Leave the Door Open" was including on many music publications' "Best of" lists for 2021, including lists from Billboard, Entertainment Weekly, Insider, Vogue, and Cosmopolitan"? And is it really worth including the "best of the week" and "best of the year so far" listings? And these listings, whatever we do with them, don't have to be tied to the critical comments; I think it would make more sense to merge those comments into the critical reception section, turning many of them into prose rather than quotes.
Accolades and critical reception are very different things. If I wanted a mono text/supermarket grocery list I would have done it that way. However, it is more engaging to the reader to have a little reason why it was one of the best songs of (day, week, year...). On top of that, the critical reception has enough description and reviews. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 12:48, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll pause there for now so we can address these points first. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:11, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Most points above are now struck. To your comment, I agree that a bullet-list-like presentation of "best of"s might be boring, and it's your choice as writer how to present this information, but I don't think the way you've done it here works. We're suppose to be putting together these sources into a coherent section. If we list what each person said about each aspect of the song, one after the other, that's not a paragraph, that's a list, in prose form.

I think this is partly because the article over-uses quotes, not just in the accolades and reception sections, but throughout. A good example is the paragraph at the end of the "Composition" section, where two different writers compare the song to the Delfonics, and a different pair of writers compare it to both the Stylistics and the Spinners. Instead of trying to pull out a common thread here, the paragraph just lists all these different opinions, which feels mechanical when you read it. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:31, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is quite coherent. Songs of the week, songs of summer and month and in another whole paragraph best songs of the year. It follows some sort of chronological order
One compares the "close-harmony seductions" other compares its "style", the "song's instrumentation" and another "Mars's falsetto". These are very different things I can't merge this. However, I removed some of the quotations. However, its strange you are asking me this since Earwig shows no problems. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 23:08, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The reason Earwig is not complaining is because you're not taking a large amount of any one source, but lots of quotes from multiple sources. Even if Earwig were showing a problem, you've correctly quoted the material; this is not about close paraphrasing or taking source wording, it's about the way the prose is structured, per WP:OVERQUOTE. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:26, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Example rewrite

[edit]

Rather than speak in generalities I thought it would be best to show you what I'm talking about. Here are two paragraphs from the composition section, which mostly deal with the lyrics. I've just removed the citation superscripts but otherwise this is as you wrote it. I've highlit the quotes in green. The only text that conveys descriptive information to the reader that is neither a quote nor an attribution is "Mars hopes the woman feels the same way he does", which is pretty close to a quote from the chorus, and "noticed playful humour in its lyrics", which takes "playful humour" from that source.

"Leave the Door Open" starts with .Paak's "raspy" voice and Mars's background ad-libs. Paak sets the scene: "We should be dancin', romancin'/ In the east wing and the west wing of this mansion." In the chorus, Mars hopes the woman feels the same way he does. Its lyrics are described as a "detailed erotic invitation" with "shameless but witty wordplay". Mars and Paak sing to a loved one "to come over for a romantic night with wine, rose petal-laced baths, and more.”
Katie Atkinson from Billboard described its lyrics as "tongue-in-cheek". NME's Sophie Williams noticed playful humour in its lyrics. Sowing from Sputnikmusic said, "Its luscious vocal harmonies are accompanied by an earthy splattering of retro-sounding drums and spacious, almost celestial-reaching, strings."

Out of 122 words, 57 are quotes, and another dozen or so are attribution; that's more than half of the text of these two paragraphs. Here's one possible way to rewrite this to reduce the number of quotes and use the remaining quotes to illustrate the article's own descriptive text. Again I've highlit in green the quotes.

The lyrics are an “erotic invitation” from the singer to a woman, encouraging her to come over to his house. .Paak sets the scene with "We should be dancin', romancin'/ In the east wing and the west wing of this mansion", and Bruno follows with the chorus, “hoping’ that you feel the way I feel”. The lyrics are full of humour, with playful references such as “if you’re hungry, girl, I got fillets”; more than one reviewer commented on the way the witty lyrics reflected the light-hearted relationship between Mars and .Paak.

Out of 92 words, 33 are quotes. Frankly that's still too much if the whole article were like that, but we are talking about the lyrics here so an extended quote is reasonable. Here are specific reasons why I cut some of the material you included:

  • to come over for a romantic night with wine, rose petal-laced baths, and more -- we've already said the invitation is to come over for a romantic evening; there's no good reason to quote a reviewer quoting the song unless it adds something. All the reader gets from this is the wine and bath with rose petals, which are from the song, not the reviewer. Part of the rule about copying is that one shouldn't copy so much that one gets the same effect as the original -- if the reader really wants to know what the song is like, copyright law says they should go and listen to it.
  • Its luscious vocal harmonies are accompanied by an earthy splattering of retro-sounding drums and spacious, almost celestial-reaching, strings -- mostly I cut this because it's not about the lyrics, it's about the music, but it's too long a quote in any case.

I hope the above convinces you that I'm not being arbitrary. The level of quoting in the article damages the prose. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:26, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The latter can go to a different paragraph. I'll make the other adjustments accordingly. I believe we should go section by section, let's start with the compostion if you are ok with the sections above, of course. Please let me know. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 15:07, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm happy to work with you on the article, but I don't think this should be done at GAN -- even if it weren't more work than should be done at GAN I don't have the bandwidth for it except at a slow pace. I propose to fail this, and I can give you feedback section-by-section as you suggest. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:50, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
GAN has this propose. You go section by section saying what you would like me to correct. On top of this, the article before nomination was submitted to the GOCE. So we do it a slow pace. No worries. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 17:10, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, I'm sorry, that's not what GAN is for. GAN is to assess whether an article is ready to promote, not to work on it, unless the fixes are relatively minor -- that's why we have quick-fail criteria. I'm failing this on prose. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 17:45, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with your review. On top of that, this is a huge mess, so I'll nominate it again. On top of this, your grasp of the reliable sources on music is minimum at the best, even with the proper links you fail to recognize them.
Kinds regards, MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 19:40, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Since you think my review is incorrect I'm going to post at WT:GAN and ask for comments. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:17, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Do whatever you want. Cheers, MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 20:47, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Leave the Door Open/GA3. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 08:57, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

I will do this over the next couple of days! --K. Peake 08:57, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I made an effort to address the issues of the last failed GA review. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 10:53, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That is fantastic; I have faith that you will do so for this one too! --K. Peake 10:58, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I might take longer than usual since I have been very busy with personal life. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 16:05, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox and lead

[edit]
  • Infobox looks good!
  • Mention in the first sentence that it is from their debut studio album, An Evening with Silk Sonic (2021).
  • In the lead single sentence, simply refer to it as the album
  • Swap the release sentence with the writing/production one
  • Shouldn't you identify .Paak and D'Mile by their stage names under songwriters in prose, especially since one is a lead artist here?
  • Add a comma before "and Brody Brown"
  • ""Leave the Door Open" is a" → "It is a"
  • "R&B and pop song," → "R&B, and pop song,"
  • "Its romantic lyrics describe" → "The romantic lyrics describe" but the quote is not sourced
  • "with many praising" → "with many critics praising"
  • "Malaysia and New Zealand." → "Malaysia, and New Zealand."
  • ""Leave the Door Open" entered the top ten" → "The song entered the top 10" per MOS:NUM
  • "Canada and Portugal." → "Canada, and Portugal."
  • Mention that the first two certifications were in the United States and New Zealand, respectively, while adding the third was in Canada
what's the point of this? As long as they are mentioned... MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 16:36, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wikilink music video
  • Shouldn't you always write .Paak for consistency?
  • "They also performed it" → "They also performed the song"
  • The tie is not notable for the lead, also make sure all the awards here are written out in the body
  • Add a comma before "and Best R&B song"

 Done

Background and release

[edit]
  • Shouldn't the two artists be wikilinked on their first mentions?
  • "met in 2017 while touring" → "met in 2017, while touring"
  • "adding "While I'm" → "adding, "While I'm"
  • "and the song title and knew" → "and the song title, and knew"
  • ""concept he wanted."" → ""concept he wanted"." per MOS:QUOTE
  • "removed pieces and rebuilt" → "removed pieces, and rebuilt"
  • "as the first single via" → "as the album's first single via"
  • Add the word stations after contemporary hit radio

 Done

Production

[edit]
  • Shouldn't .Paak and D'Mile be identified by their stage names consistently?
  • Add a comma before Christopher Brody Brown
  • "Emma Kummrow and Gared Crawford" → "Emma Kummrow, and Gared Crawford"
  • "Tess Varley and Luigi Mazzocchi." → "Tess Varley, and Luigi Mazzocchi."

 Done

Composition

[edit]
  • Audio sample looks good!
  • ""Leave the Door Open" is a" → "Musically, "Leave the Door Open" is a"
  • "are described as "honeyed", Silk Sonic's are seen" → "have been described as "honeyed", Silk Sonic's were seen"
  • [23][17][24] why are these not numerically ordered like in the previous sentence? Also, maybe invoke this group only after the second sentence since these two are consecutive.
  • "are "accompanied by retro-sounding drums and spacious strings."" → "are accompanied by "retro-sounding drums and spacious ... strings"." per MOS:QUOTE and the source
  • Wikilink tempo
  • "The vocal's ranges span" → "The vocal range spans"
  • ""hoping that you" → ""hopin' that you" per the source
  • Pipe Vulture to Vulture.com per MOS:LINK2SECT
  • "being "serious" composition," → "being a "serious" composition,"
  • "He found it" → "He found the song"
  • "Parx responded "You" → "Parx responded, "You"
  • "still very contemporary"." → "still very contemporary.""
  • "Mars doesn't allow Paak's fulfillment as" → "Mars does not allow Paak's fulfillment, as"
  • Maybe write "reach a peak" instead of new heights?
  • "a "resolution" it enters" → "a "resolution", it enters"
  • "its end a" → "the end, a"
  • "coming through" and it" → "coming through", and it"
  • "found similarities to his" → "also found similarities to his track"
  • Wikilink NME
  • Wikilink Jon Pareles
  • "the Stylistics and the Manhattans sound." → "the Stylistics, and the Manhattans sound."
  • "resemble songs by" → "resembles songs by"
  • "the Chi-Lites and the O'Jays." → "the Chi-Lites, and the O'Jays."

 Done

Critical reception

[edit]
  • "received universal critical acclaim" → "was met with universal critical acclaim"
  • Any specific order here?
  • Shouldn't you stay with .Paak for consistency?
  • Full introduction to Pareles is not needed when you did this in the previous section
  • "lyrics and the contrast" → "lyrics, and the contrast"
  • "good things to revive."" → "good things to revive"." per MOS:QUOTE
  • Siroky's full name is not needed per previous
  • "luxurious, velvety goodness."" → "luxurious, velvety goodness"."
  • "Jem Aswad called the track "a glorious blast of vintage R&B", Aswad" → "Aswad called the track "a glorious blast of vintage R&B"; he" since full name is not needed again
  • Wikilink Marvin Gaye
  • Sophie Williams's full name is not needed per previous
  • "lauded the track. McDuffie added," → "lauded the track, writing that"
  • "by Mars's sultry crooning."" → "by Mars's sultry crooning"."
  • ""outstanding ... the harmonies" → ""outstanding ... [the] harmonies" per the source, also the wrong URL is invoked here
  • ".Paak's taut drum fills."" → ".Paak's taut drum fills"."
  • Remove wikilink on An Evening with Silk Sonic
  • "satisfying molten cheese."" → "satisfying molten cheese"."
  • "and substance to match."" → "and substance to match"."
  • "and medallion combo."" → "and medallion combo"."
  • "added, "Mars's earnest delivery" → "added that Mars's "earnest delivery"
  • "you off your feet." → "you off your feet"."
  • Mention that the list was created for Entertainment Tonight
  • ""perfectly timeless record."" → ""perfectly timeless record"."
  • Remove wikilink on Bobby Womack
  • "the throwback charm."" → "the throwback charm"."
  • "acknowledge the present."" → "acknowledge the present"."

 Done

Accolades

[edit]
  • Again, stop using full names when they have already been used
  • The Consequence ranking should be third for chronological order
  • "on Mars' 2016" → "on Bruno Mars' ... 2016"
  • ""inviting and sensual"." → ""inviting [and] sensual"."
  • ""neither is going" → ""Neither is going" per the source
  • "up and cheer."" → "up and cheer"." per MOS:QUOTE
  • Pipe Complex to Complex (magazine) per MOS:LINK2SECT
  • "Jessica McKinney wrote," → "Jessica McKinney wrote that"
  • "but "Leave the Door Open" does" → "but 'Leave the Door Open' does"
  • "by Billboard Staff Picks" → "by Billboard Staff Picks"
  • "among the best songs of the year" → "among the best songs of 2021" per this being a new para
  • "born until decades later." → "born until decades later"."
  • "ranked the song at number ten" → "ranked the song at number 10" per MOS:NUM
  • "modern music, the duo" → "modern music ... the duo" per the source
  • Italicise Soul Train per the source
  • Wikilink Rob Sheffield
  • "for 2021. It is" → "for 2021 ... it is" per the source
  • "a pheromone rush."" → "a pheromone rush"."
  • "offering from the duo."" → "offering from the duo"."
  • "songs of 2021 according" → "songs of 2021, according"
  • "to the '70s."" → "to the '70s"."
  • "They wrote, "With its" → "They wrote that "with its"
  • "newspapers and broadcasters from" → "newspapers, and broadcasters from"

 Done

Awards and nominations

[edit]
  • Write out the notable ones like the Grammys in prose above the table, i.e. provide a summary here
  • Per WP:OVERLINK, I would recommend only linking to the edition of each awards show in the first table and using rowspan for the years 2021 and 2022 themselves

 Done

Commercial performance

[edit]

North America

[edit]
  • "the US Billboard Hot 100 with 27,000 downloads, 23.5 million streams and" → "the US Billboard Hot 100, with 27,000 downloads, 23.5 million streams, and"
  • "the Hot 100 with 28,600 copies sold, 21.5 million streams and" → "the Hot 100, with 28,600 copies sold, 21.5 million streams, and"
  • "It became Paak's first" → "The track became Paak's first"
  • Pipe Drake to Drake (musician)
  • "Katy Perry and Rihanna" → "Katy Perry, and Rihanna" with the wikilinks
  • "helped by its placement in" → "helped by the placement in"
  • Wikilink iTunes Store
  • Mention the certification was for pushing 2,000,000 certified units in the United States and when
  • "reached the top ten of" → "reached the top 10 of the" per MOS:NUM
  • "to reach the top ten." → "to achieve this."
  • Add commas around featuring Cardi B
  • "rise to the top ten." → "rise to the top 10."
  • "topped the chart becoming" → "topped the chart, becoming"
  • "and Rhythmic chart." → "and Rhythmic charts."
  • "It took four weeks to" → "The song took four weeks to"
  • "to enter the top ten" → "to enter the top 10"
  • Mention how many units it sold in Canada and the date of the certification

 Done

International

[edit]
  • Pipe New Zealand Singles Chart to Official New Zealand Music Chart
  • Mention how many shipments it had in New Zealand and the date of the certification
  • "peaked at number ten" → "peaked at number 10" per MOS:NUM
  • "It spent twenty weeks on the chart, so far." → "The song lasted for 20 weeks on the chart."
  • "including Costa Rica where it" → "including Costa Rica, where it"
  • "It also entered the top ten in Chile and top twenty" → "The song also entered the top 10 in Chile and top 20"
  • You should not capitalize diamond
  • "at its peak number of 18" → "at its peak of number 18"
  • Mention how many sales it had in Portugal and the date of the certification
  • "on the Dutch Top 40 charts after" → "on the Dutch Top 40 chart, after" but the entry position is not sourced
  • "It peaked at number 13" → "The song peaked at number 13"
  • Pipe Single Top 100 to Dutch Single Top 100
  • "at number ten on" → "at number 10 on"
  • "spending 58 weeks on the chart so far." → "spending 58 weeks on the chart."

 Done

Music video

[edit]
  • Wikilink music video
  • "Mars on the piano and" → "Mars on the piano, and"
  • Lowercase the Hooligans per MOS:THEMUSIC
  • "electric keyboard and other percussion instruments" → "electric keyboard, and other percussion instruments"
  • "Silk Sonic and the band are wearing" → "Silk Sonic and the band wear"

 Done

Reception

[edit]
  • "Mary Siroky and the Consequence of Sound staff" → "Siroky and the Consequence staff"

 Done

Live performances and other usage

[edit]

Grammy Awards performance

[edit]
  • "exchange with Mars telling" → "exchange with Mars, telling"
  • Remove commas around Harvey Mason Jr. and Ben Winston
  • "They made their performance" → "Silk Sonic made their performance"
  • The 70s aesthetic is not sourced
  • "replacing Paak, and the latter would sing along" → "replacing Paak, who sang along"
  • "of "twinkle effects and star" → "of "twinkle effects and visual star" per the source
  • "The performance received" → "The performance was met with"
  • "Grammy Awards". Todiso dubbed" → "Grammy Awards", dubbing"
  • Italicise Entertainment Weekly
  • The source uses glooses, not glosses
  • "ranking it eighth on" → "with a ranking of eighth on"
  • "shimmery luxury soul."" → "shimmery luxury soul"." per MOS:QUOTE
  • "from Los Angeles Times and MTV News's Patrick Hosken" → "from the Los Angeles Times, and MTV News's Hosken"
  • [122][24][123] is not correct either numerically or lining up with the sources in prose
  • "Zoe Haylock of Vulture commented" → "Haylock of Vulture commented"

 Done

iHeartRadio Music Awards performance

[edit]
  • Where is the first verse sourced?
  • ""crowd sang it" → ""crowd ... sang it"
  • ""Let's go! Let's go!"."" → ""Let's go! Let's go!"" per MOS:QUOTE
  • "to the chorus" needs a full-stop
  • "an "up-close and" → "an "even up-closer and"
  • "The performance received" → "The performance was met with"
  • Add commas around writing for Entertainment Tonight
  • "Nina Corcoran found it" → "Nina Corcoran found the performance"
  • "Joe Lynch from Billboard praised their performance" → "Lynch from Billboard praised the duo's performance"
  • "to would have."" → "to would have"."
  • Italicise Entertainment Tonight Canada

 Done

BET Awards performance

[edit]
  • Remove wikilink on BET Awards 2021
  • The vaccination part is not sourced
  • "and bottle service girls."" → "and bottle service girls"." per MOS:QUOTE
  • "the new album?" and" → "the new album?", and"
  • "to a commercial break."" → "to a commercial break"."
  • "brought "the house down". Drysdale dubbed Mars and Paak's vocals" → "brought "the house down", while dubbing the vocals"
  • "winning the BET Best Group Award." → "winning the BET Best Group award." with the pipe
  • "with their velvety performance."" → "with [their] velvety performance"." per the source

 Done

Other usage

[edit]
  • "at the 63rd Annual Grammy Awards" → "at the 63rd Annual Grammy Awards,"
  • "Colbert" so Corden could "get some good ratings."" → "Colbert", so Corden could "get some good ratings"." per MOS:QUOTE
  • "analog television set."" → "analog television set"."
  • "It then proceeded to" → "The parody then proceeded to"
  • "the TV on mute," → "the TV" on mute," since the actual quote ends here
  • Merge the last two paras per the overly short size

 Done

Track listing

[edit]
  • Add the sources for both of these

 Done

Personnel

[edit]

 Done

Charts

[edit]

Weekly charts

[edit]
  • The Israel source does not display the position
  • Pipe Gaon to Circle Digital Chart, also the source is dead so I hope there is an archive with this position
  • The Venezuela source displays a position of number 38, not 34

 Done

Monthly charts

[edit]
  • Good

Year-end charts

[edit]
  • Pipe to Billboard Year-End Hot 100 singles of 2021 should only be on Billboard Hot 100, for consistency with the first table

 Done

Certifications

[edit]
  • Good

Release history

[edit]

 Done

See also

[edit]
  • Good

Notes

[edit]
  • Good

References

[edit]
  • Copyvio score looks really good at 30.6%!!
  • Make sure all of these are archived by using the tool
  • For any Billboard pro refs, cite them as url-access subscription since all those are restricted
  • Fix MOS:QWQ issues with refs 5, 27, 28
  • Pipe Vulture to Vulture.com on ref 7 per MOS:LINK2SECT
  • AllAccess → All Access on refs 8 and 9
  • Maybe ref 10 should cite Radio Monitor as the publisher instead?
See Wikipedia:Singles criteria. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 17:33, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pipe Complex to Complex (magazine) on ref 12 and fix MOS:QWQ issues
  • WP:OVERLINK of Atlantic Records and Aftermath Entertainment on ref 16
  • Cite AllMusic as publisher instead on refs 19 and 42, only wikilinking on the first instance
  • Remove the speech mark from ref 20
  • Remove staff from refs 21, 30, 43, 48, 49, 50, 52, 54 and 125, as only those who can be named properly should be cited as authors
  • Author-link Jon Pareles on ref 23
  • Cite MTV News as publisher instead on ref 24
  • Cite Sputnikmusic as publisher instead on ref 25
  • Wikilink NME on ref 26 instead of ref 148
  • WP:OVERLINK of Los Angeles Times on ref 29
  • Fix the formatting of ref 35's author
  • WP:OVERLINK of Pitchfork on ref 38
  • Fix MOS:CAPS issues with refs 41 and 109
  • WP:OVERLINK of Uproxx on ref 45
  • Remove the author from ref 52
  • Wikilink Billboard Argentina on ref 60
  • WP:OVERLINK of Variety on ref 66
  • What makes ref 69 a reliable source?
Launched in 1998, one of the most visited websites in Thailand. On top of that, the website and Joox are operated by the same company. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 16:17, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wikilink The Hollywood Reporter on ref 70
  • Wikilink Media Forest on ref 90
  • Wikilink Monitor Latino on ref 91 instead on ref 94
  • WP:OVERLINK of Billboard on ref 97
  • Pipe People to People (magazine) on ref 115 instead on ref 119
  • Billbord → Billboard on ref 122
  • Author-link Jon Caramanica on ref 127
  • Author-link Ben Sisario on ref 128
  • Consequence of Sound → Consequence on ref 137
  • Only keep the publisher for ref 167
  • Cite Gaon Chart as publisher instead on ref 168 and pipe to Circle Digital Chart
  • WP:OVERLINK of Rolling Stone on ref 176
  • Only keep the publisher for ref 178
  • Pipe Gaon Music Chart to Circle Chart on ref 191
  • Cite hitparade.ch as publisher instead on ref 192

 Done

Final comments and verdict

[edit]

@Kyle Peake: So I have addressed every issue but References. Nevertheless, I would like you to take a look at everything before I move on as I left some Q&A on the Production, Critical reception and iHeartRadio Music Awards performance sections. I have also tried to fix the lead section for the RIAA per your suggestion. Any feedback would be very much appreciated. Cheers, MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 10:36, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by RoySmith (talk) 22:10, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by MarioSoulTruthFan (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 20:07, 25 November 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • The source is verified as well as it passing GA within five days. My only concern with the hook is that it should not be assumed readers know who Silk Song are or why the bridge almost broke up the band. Possibly expand the hook just a bit? Erick (talk) 04:20, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm retracting my review for now, as I see I didn't do an adequate job of reviewing this and I apologize for it.
@Magiciandude: Would you mind if I take over the rest of the review? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:23, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Onegreatjoke: That's actually much better! I apologize Narutolovehinata5, but I am going to pass this article as my article has already been reviewed.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Leave_the_Door_Open&oldid=1208092680"