Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Feather (song)/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 Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 12 November 2024 [1].

Feather (song)

Nominator(s): N Ø 07:10, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sabrina Carpenter, who thankfully does not need much of an introduction in 2024, found her first taste of success with the song "Feather" before, um, swiftly rising to superstardom the following year. The song's music video was a classic display of her twisted humor and got a priest in a world of trouble... I probably still have the Meghan Trainor demo of her debut single on an old laptop somewhere. What a great song it was but such a far cry from her raunchy music now. Also, her new album cover bears an eery resemblance to the Title cover. Would be pretty cool if Ms. Carpenter can gain her first FA within her breakout year. Thanks a lot to everyone who will take the time to give their feedback here.--N Ø 07:10, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Crisco 1492

believed it was easy to listen to - That's... nondescript. Is there perhaps a more meaty means of summarizing critical views?

Critical reviews generally hovered around calling it light, feathery, digestible, breezy, and airy so this seemed like the best way of capturing that. Open to suggestions.

Perhaps explicitly say "Music critics praised the production of "Feather", describing it as light and breezy."? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:57, 18 October 2024 (UTC)T[reply]

Done--N Ø 21:33, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

number 21 on ... first number one - Inconsistency in spelling of numbers ("Comparable values nearby one another should be all spelled out or all in figures, even if one of the numbers would normally be written differently: patients' ages were five, seven, and thirty-two or ages were 5, 7, and 32, but not ages were five, seven, and 32.", per MOS:NUMNOTES)
Mia Barnes - worth a redlink?

She does not seem to be notable based on a search.

It depicts several men who mistreat Carpenter dying - This could be made a bit clearer, perhaps "It depicts the deaths of several men who mistreat Carpenter, who then dances at their joint funeral in the Our Lady of Mount Carmel/Annunciation Parish church."
her set list for the Emails I Can't Send Tour, the Eras Tour, and the Short n' Sweet Tour. - Maybe "her set list for the Emails I Can't Send, Eras, and Short n' Sweet tours to avoid repetition?
perceived to be an answer song to Olivia Rodrigo's 2021 single "Drivers License". - Perceived by whom?
Carpenter's manager - if we had a name, we could avoid some repetition.

I kept the name out since she isn't really a public figure and is non-notable.

Hard to imagine that the manager of a multi-million dollar pop star is not a public figure, but I defer to you. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:57, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Feather" is a pop,[20] dance,[21] dance-pop,[2] disco,[22] and neo-disco song,[3] - Given how subjective genres can be, I think it may be worth something like "'Feather' has been identified as
which lasts for three minutes and five seconds - Is this the sped-up version, or the original version? Or are both 3:05?

It's the original version. Since the sped-up version didn't really gain notability, I think its duration would be excess detail.

Then at least specify which version, as the sentence immediately preceding mentions how there are two versions. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:57, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done--N Ø 21:33, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reminiscing their memories together - I believe "reminiscing" is generally followed by about when used as a verb
send him pictures - "send him pictures" could be pictures of the dog, food, whatever, which would not necessarily be "stereotypical". If the source supports what this sentence seems to be implying ("nudes"), it should be made explicit.

"You fit every stereotype, 'Send a pic'" is the lyric so it being nudes isn't stated but the behavior being stereotypical is.

Do the sources discuss this lyric? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:57, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's cited to American Songwriter, where the lyric appears. I haven't encountered any sources inferring a nude is being discussed, unfortunately.--N Ø 21:33, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With 37 weeks, it is her longest-charting track on the ranking - Two things... "with 37 weeks" is unclear (you seem to mean "Spending 37 weeks in the Billboard Hot 100"). Second, this information could end up dated and as such should use {{as of}}.

Is there a guideline stating the use of the as of template is necessary? I would prefer to just remove the statement when it is no longer true.

Yes. Wikipedia:As of stipulates that "If you suspect that a fact in an article will become dated at some point in the future, and want to ensure that people will update it, include a tag of the form {{As of}} or {{As of}}". — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:57, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done--N Ø 21:33, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

her achievements in 2024 - Being...? As someone unfamiliar with Carpenter, this only raises questions.

This falls out of scope of the article but I have incorporated it as a note since it is a valid question, really.

sharing a clip of it on Instagram - I'd nix "of it"
before getting ran over by a truck. - "run"; this is the present perfect tense, which requires V3 ("run", see Collins)
I'd link Knee highs
gruesomely is a value judgment, and thus should be attributed or removed (per WP:WIKIVOICE, point 1)
She pulls his tie while exiting it and puts it between the elevator shaft, decapitating him in the process - pulls ... pulls

I didn't understand.

Sorry, nix that. I read "pulls" there twice. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:57, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tulle - Probably should be linked to Tulle (netting)
afront - Ironically, per Merriam-Webster this means "next to" ("abreast"). You probably mean "in front of"
Others also likened the visuals to Jennifer's Body, - We already had Jennifer's Body mentioned immediately before this... is it really necessary to repeat?

I think it is necessary so we are representing all three of the critics that had this opinion. It is to give additional weightage compared to the movies that only received comparisons by two critics.

I see your point, but at the same time having the title repeated immediately after its first mention does not meet the "professional quality" standard at WP:FA?. There should be a bit of reworking. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:57, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done--N Ø 21:33, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

character "the Girlfriend Reaper and compared it to the Grim Reaper. - Missing a closing quote, and this could be handled a bit more gracefully to avoid repeating "reaper" (for example, "the Girlfriend Reaper")
the Emails I Can't Send Tour and the Eras Tour - Another repetition of "tour"
She opened her KIIS-FM Jingle Ball set with the song in December 2023, clad in a red mini-dress and gloves on one date and a white corset top, shorts, and gloves on another. - Probably worth mentioning explicitly that this was a two-day event (in which case "sets" probably works best)
I'm seeing a lot of focus on Carpenter's outfits during these performances. How relevant are they to the topic?

I generally let the sources decide this. If reliable, secondary sources cover outfits I usually give them some air time in the article. In this case, the dress being decorated with feathers seems relevant to the song topic and the Jingle Bell outfits seem to be Christmas color-themed and relevant to the event.

Not a formal source review, but I'm seeing some references are not in order (see, for example, [62][60][63] and [65][63])

Overall, this is fairly easy to digest. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 17:26, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review, Chris! I hope the changes are satisfactory.--N Ø 18:33, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Supporting on prose; as someone whose musical tastes mostly stop at 2010-ish, I can't comment on comprehensiveness, but the prose appears solid. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 21:50, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

""Feather" is song" => ""Feather" is a song"

This drove me crazy so I tracked it back and apparently it has been in the article since April... Crazy how I just kept skipping over the first sentence assuming it must be correct.

"Island Records released its sped-up version for digital download and streaming on August 4, 2023." - is this the only version that was released?

The digital download and streaming release on that date was indeed just the sped-up version.

I was more meaning....was there no other version released at all? Seems odd to mention the release of the "sped-up version" (what even is that, anyway?) but not any other version....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:20, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added that the original version was later promoted to airplay, if that helps? I know it's a bit odd but the sped-up version's release did begin the promotion of this song as a single so it seems to be the appropriate one for the lead.--N Ø 18:33, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"became Carpenter's first one to reach the top 40" => "became Carpenter's first song to reach the top 40"
"puts it between the elevator shaft" - I don't think you can put something "between" a singular object
"which People's Jack Irvin believed was upraised" - what does "upraised" mean? Never seen this word before......
That's all I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:14, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for the review, ChrisTheDude. I think I got everything!--N Ø 17:52, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:25, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source and image review

This time I'll let File:Feather screenshot.png pass, even though it illustrates a subtopic, because this subtopic is apparently more relevant than usual to the article topic. Otherwise, it seems like image use, rationale and placement are OK. ALT text is OK. Sources seem to be mainstream and I guess adequate and consistently formatted. What is rollingstoneindia.com, is it affiliated with Rolling Stone? What makes The Fader a high-quality reliable source? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:57, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, according to Reuters, Rolling Stone India is the Indian version of the Rolling Stone magazine, which is considered a prestigious source for musical commentary. The Fader is considered a reliable source according to WP:RSMUSIC and the author, Raphael Helfand, has contributed to the publication Pitchfork. Although I have removed it since the cited information appears in the other sources. Agreed with you about the music video screenshot. Do the reviews pass now, Jo-Jo Eumerus? Best, N Ø 11:24, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think so, yes, although I must state a caveat that this isn't a topic where I know the sources well. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:27, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Ippantekina

MaranoFan, how could you write good-quality articles about both Sabrina and Olivia? I thought the had a feud or something! Anyways, gonna leave some comments very soon. My review is prose-focused btw. I haven't listened to this song yet, but "Espresso" is a catchy (albeit a little annoying) one. Ippantekina (talk) 07:40, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ippantekina, doing my seven-day reminder a day early. I've heard Halloween is a good time to enjoy the music video, so you might be interested in finally checking out the song :) Although, the performances are a good option too. Have you ever tried this one?--N Ø 04:42, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Overall a smooth read. Some issues that I see:

Do we have an exact release date for the radio release? If not I think the Hits source can provide a range (at least month).

The earliest mention of "Feather" on Hits is November 7, where it was grabbing 12 "more" stations. Unfortunately, this does not give a clear idea of when the impact happened.--N Ø 06:04, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Critics have identified" kind of nitpick-y but why not the present tense/simple past tense but the present perfect tense?
"I feel so much lighter like a feather with you off my mind". the period should be inside the quotation marks per MOS:LQ - make sure other parts of the article also adhere to this
shouldn't there be a comma before this part: "according to Rolling Stone India's Amit Vaidya"?
"Carpenter employs a delicate vocal style on the song" hmm, I think something like "Carpenter's vocals are delicate on the song" could read better
I wouldn't include hyperlinks in quotes per MOS:LWQ (e.g. "a neo-disco bop", "a masterclass in 2020s pop music")

Looking at MOS:LWQ, it seems to discourage their use if there is a chance they do not convey the author's intended meaning. The links in this case are straightforward, in my opinion. The 2020s in music article, in particular, has a dedicated paragraph about Carpenter which is useful.--N Ø 06:04, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The number of critical reviews is surprisingly little.. have we got more retrospective reviews/rankings of Carpenter's songs etc.?

Medium.com is the only other source that has featured "Feather" on a ranking of Carpenter's discography, but that is a blog-hosting service.--N Ø 06:04, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Kelsey Barnes of Grammy" I would write the website out as Grammy.com
Are there any better words than "noted" (MOS:NOTED)?
This might be the source reviewer's responsibility but I think Rolling Stone should be |url-access=limited and not subscription-only.
And that's it :) Ippantekina (talk) 03:55, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Ippantekina. All done!--N Ø 06:04, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MaranoFan: Thanks for addressing my comments. I'm leaning support -- although I still think the pipe to "2020s pop music" is quite unhelpful... ("bop" might be though). For the Hits source, I would write something like, "The trade magazine Hits reported that "Feather" was sent to US radio by November 2023." Ippantekina (talk) 03:00, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done on both points.--N Ø 07:51, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support on prose. Ippantekina (talk) 01:40, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aoba47

For this part in the lead, (and its original version was later promoted to radio stations by Republic Records), I would clarify what is meant by later as that is rather unclear at least to me.
I have a comment for this part from the lead, (issued a statement that he was "appalled" by the church scenes). I am not sure that the quote is necessary. I believe that this could be paraphrased without losing anything. Some suggestions are "a statement against the church scenes" or "a statement criticizing the church scenes", but go with what you think is best.
I have a nitpick for this part, (Emails I Can't Send Fwd:, which she did not view as a follow-up to the original album but "just a few songs that belong in the Emails world" to thank her fans). I believe that the semicolon should be a comma as the part after that is not an independent sentence and is instead a dependent clause.

The colon is not a grammatical device in this case, but a part of the album title. It can be seen on Apple Music for example.--N Ø 02:11, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for clarifying that for me, and apologies for missing it. I am not sure how I misread that so it was just a silly mistake on my part. Aoba47 (talk) 03:24, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do we have a more specific date or time frame for this sentence: (Republic Records eventually promoted the song to radio in the United States.). Eventually is rather vague.

The best information available regarding this is that the song hit the top 10 in early November 2023, so I have now included that this happened later within the same year.--N Ø 02:11, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is fair. Thank you for the response. I know that sometimes more exact dates or time frames are not made available for singles. The revision makes sense to me. Aoba47 (talk) 03:24, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For the first sentence of the "Composition" section, I would clarify who is describing the song in this way. I am imagining that this is referencing critics so I would go with something like "Critics have identified 'Feather' as ... ". With that change, it would also avoid having two paragraphs in a row starting with the song title.
I am uncertain about this sentence: (The original version lasts for three minutes and five seconds.) I believe that you are specifying "the original version" to clarify that this is not referencing either the sped-up version or some other version, but it does read a bit unnecessary to clarify a certain version is a certain length if the lengths of the other versions are not mentioned here as well.
I would suggest that pre-chorus is linked to help people who may be unfamiliar with this type of music jargon.
Apologies again as I believe that this has been discussed above. I am unclear on on what the "send him pictures" line means in this part, (ask her to do stereotypical things like send him pictures). Send pictures of what? How is that stereotypical? I looked at the citations for the sentence, and I could only see this lyric in the American Songwriter source, but it does not really discuss it separately and it is instead quoted in a longer set of lyrics from the song. I am uncertain on how useful this part is if it cannot be clarified further.
It appears that Carpenter has performed this song while dressed up as Sandy from Grease for the Halloween performance of her tour. It is only covered in Cosmopolitan from what I can see so it may not be notable enough to include in the article, but I still wanted to raise this to your attention regardless.

I hope a slightly better reputed source will pick the story up in a few days, which is possible given the recency. While Cosmo would situationally be a reliable source for fashion matters, I do question if just them covering it justifies due weightage of its inclusion.--N Ø 02:11, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your assessment. I am uncertain if this performance will get any additional coverage, or any real coverage in more music-based sources, as it is just one stop on a larger tour and it is a performance of an older song, as opposed to her new singles. As I said in my comment, I did not find much on it, but again, just wanted to bring it to your attention as it is rather recent. Aoba47 (talk) 03:24, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Great work as always. I hope that these comments are helpful. They are most justly minor nitpicks, but let me know if there is anything that needs further clarification. I hope you are having a great weekend so far, and best of luck with the FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 21:39, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aoba47: Thank you for the review! N Ø 02:11, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the responses. I support this FAC for promotion based on the prose. Aoba47 (talk) 03:24, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Query for the coordinators

@FAC coordinators: May I initiate another nomination?--N Ø 04:32, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:54, 7 November 2024 (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. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:14, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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