Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/I Am the Best/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 archived by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 16 October 2023 [1].

I Am the Best

[edit]
Nominator(s): ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 14:03, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a K-pop song called "I Am the Best" by 2NE1. It is often regarded as a classic in the K-pop world with it being one of the most popular songs that went against the "cute" or "sexy" female stereotypes that were common amongst Korean girl groups around that time. In addition, it was one of the first Korean-language songs (after Gangnam Style) to make waves in the western world upon being featured in a Microsoft commercial, with various critics noting "I Am the Best" as one of the works that helped spread the Korean wave. This is my first featured article nomination, and was also the first article rewritten by me to be upgraded to good article status back in December 2020. After a large amount of edits since then, I believe this article meets FA quality standards. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 14:03, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First-time nomination

[edit]

GWL

[edit]

I don't consider myself a Kpop fan, but this is one of the few songs I'd listen to out of the blue; even with the continuous airplays it doesn't get old. Here to save this nom from entering the FAC void. I've put invisible comments to divide my comments based on sections. GeraldWL 07:40, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, thank you for all the feedback you've given for this FAC, I appreciate it a lot. I believe that I addressed all of your points—aside from the Justin Bieber thing, as I find it extremely, and I mean extremely, hard to believe that this song was originally a collab with Justin Bieber. The body of the article refers to it as an "alternate version" so I figured that would suffice. Best, ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 18:37, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it's a good idea to use our opinion to alter what the singer herself has stated. There have been many unexpected collabs in the music industry, but they happened anyways, and this is no exception. Not-so-popular singers have seen collabs with famous ones, so I can't see where the impossibility is. The crucial word here too is "unreleased", the equivalent to deleted scenes in movies-- they were originally supposed to be there, but it was decided it'd be left out. It is best to stay true to the source, especially when it directly quotes the subject. I'll continue with some more prose comments after this is resolved. GeraldWL 03:21, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I should just stick to the source actually. Ready for more comments. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 03:38, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments #1: 04:00, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
* Sound review: please complete the rationale for the soundclip.
  • Image review: please complete the rationale for the mv. Ippan'[s comments seem to be resolved with the OTRS verification ticket. Free images seem to have proper licenses too. In the caption; "at Google Korea" might be excessive info
  • The exlink to the mv might be repetitive of the infobox exlink
  • Are there any more sources that can be archived?
  • Change url status to dead, ref 38. Make sure to check the other archives too, IABot can't seem to catch 'em.
  • If the video archives dont work use Ghostarchive
  • Add links to the website/publisher in refs: 10, 14, 16-18, 21, 22, 25-27, 29, 31, 32, 34-36, 38, 48-55, 59-61, 64, 65, 68, 74, 77, 80, 82 (Naver), 88, 89-91 (Naver), 92, 93 (SCMP), 96-98, 104, 107, 111, 114-116, 119, 121-128.
  • Change website to publisher parameter (or vice versa): 16, 22, 80 (Yonhap News Agency), 92, 104 (Fox), 107 (Capital London), 112, 117, 128.
  • Add publisher: ref 28, 110. Remove publisher in ref 108 as its identical to the website name.
  • Gaon Music Chart --> Gaon Digital Chart
  • "from the EP 2NE1 (2011) and Nolza"-- does the 2011 need to be specified here? I think it's repetitive given there's a release year just below.
  • "This article is about the 2011 single by 2NE1" --> "This article is about the 2NE1 single"
  • "for their self-titled second EP" --> "for their self-titled second extended play (EP)"
  • "it would be a more intense song, with a quick tempo (combining electronic music and hip-hop) and would be familiar to the youth who are used to clubbing culture." --> "with a quick tempo (combining electronic music and hip-hop), it was intended to be more intense and familiar to the youth who are used to clubbing culture."
  • "download via Recochoku"-- it's encouraged to use Template:Interlanguage link for links to other wikis
  • Here and in the lead: I think empowerment is overlinking
  • The last paragraph: the source states it was originally meant to be with Bieber, meaning it's not alternate. You can weave this in somewhere in paragraph 1, saying that like, "It was originally intended to feature Justin Bieber but was later omitted."
  • "They received awards for Best New Artist Video and Best Dance & Electronic Song with "I Am the Best"" --> "The song also received awards for Best New Artist Video and Best Dance & Electronic Song"
  • "and the song reached the top spot" --> "and reached the top spot"
Resolved comments #2: 05:52, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
* "by GG (Park Myung-soo & G-Dragon) feat. Bom" --> "by GG (Park Myung-soo & G-Dragon) and Bom". "feat." isn't the kinda word WP would abbreviate.
  • The Japan part is at a very awkward position. It's weird that it is combined with Korea even with the word "Elsewhere" (it'd make sense if it's in the second paragraph "Elswhere in Japan .... Meanwhile in the US"). But at the same time, combining it with the US would make the second paragraph too long. What I think you can do is have it be a separate second paragraph combined with the France part, since they only make up a couple lines, leaving Korea and US as having separate paragraphs since they have a more elaborate history.
  • You can also make it into one sentence: "Elsewhere, in Japan, the song was certified gold by the Recording Industry Association of Japan (RIAJ) for digital sales of over 100,000 units, but only peaked at number 37 on the RIAJ Digital Track Chart and number 53 on the Billboard Japan Hot 100." Add Billboard since it might be misunderstood as being RIAJ's chart.
  • "Microsoft Corporation"-- corporation is redundant
  • "Surface Pro 3 commercial" --> "Surface Pro 3 laptop commercial"
  • "As a result of increased exposure from the advertising campaign, the song reached" --> "It further increased exposure to the song, which reached"
  • "The song received airplay from radio stations in New York and Boston"-- NY or NYC?
The source just says New York
  • The second, third, and so forth mentions of the US can just be referred with the abbreviation
  • "After a three-day delay due to a scaling issue"-- what's a scaling issue?
  • Link Adidas, DVD, AK-47
  • "The music video has been called "extraordinary, intense and eye-catching""-- by who? Also I feel like this fragment belongs best in Reception.
Removed
  • Link glam punk, un-hyphenate it
  • "The group"-- it's awkward to start the section this way --> "2NE1"
  • Link Okinawa
  • Motorbikes is overlink
  • "was ranked the eighth-best Olympic live music performance of all time"-- by who?
By the Olympics
  • "in the drama Mr. Queen" --> "in the drama series Mr. Queen"
  • "for the 2019 Kia Forte by Kia Canada" --> "for the 2019 Kia Forte car by Kia Canada"-- add Kia Canada link
  • "GQ named it one of 24 songs"-- GQ dup link
  • "along with the intro to "Gangnam Style" to be released the following year." even with omitting "to be" it still holds the same message
Done all. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 05:29, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Looks much better now imo, so I'm supporting! This is a rare FAC where even entering the old nominations section doesn't attract multiple editors, so I'm glad to fill in the spot. Wish this article all the best. GeraldWL 05:54, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator comment

[edit]

Three weeks in and just the single general support. Unless this nomination makes significant further progress towards a consensus to promote over the next three or four days I am afraid that it is liable to be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:05, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport from Chris

[edit]
  • "integrates a variety of musical genres such as electro house, electronic and hip hop, complete with instrumentations of synthesizers" - I think "integrates a variety of musical genres such as electro house, electronic and hip hop, featuring synthesizers" would be cleaner
  • "and middle eastern inspired rifts" - pretty sure you mean riffs, not rifts
  • "achieving the number one position on the Gaon Digital Chart and garnered" => "achieving the number one position on the Gaon Digital Chart and garnering"
  • "it would be a more intense song, with a quick tempo (combining electronic music and hip-hop), it was intended to be more intense and familiar to the youth who are used to clubbing culture" => "it would be a more intense song, with a quick tempo (combining electronic music and hip-hop), and was intended to be more intense and familiar to the youth who are used to clubbing culture"
  • "praised it's energy" => "praised its energy"
  • "calling it "show-stopping" and further noted" = "calling it "show-stopping", and further noted"
  • "bound by the sound of other countries'" => "bound by the sound of other countries"
  • "Caramanica called 2NE1 powerful influence in the industry" => "Caramanica called 2NE1 a powerful influence in the industry"
  • "By the end of 2011, the song accumulated" => "By the end of 2011, the song had accumulated"
  • "As of October 2014, the song has held" => "As of October 2014, the song held"
  • On that last point, is it really as of 2014? The source seems to be dated 2020.....
  • "It features CL sporting a wrestler (complete with a sparkling WWE championship belt), futuristic and punk-inspired attire, metal-studded leather pieces, and unconventional hairstyles;" - does all of that relate to CL (even the multiple hairstyles) or are there some words missing?
  • "Jung Hae-in's character watches Son Ye-jin's casually dancing" => "Jung Hae-in's character watches Son Ye-jin casually dancing"
  • "It was featured in the season 10" => "It was featured in season 10"
  • That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:19, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for your feedback! Done with all. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 21:38, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:56, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source review (Pass)

[edit]
  • What makes these high-quality sources: Musicstax, Don't Bore Us, Dailymotion, PopCrush, Teenage Magazine, Capital FM, Bleeding Cool?
Removed Musicstax, Don't Bore Us, PopCrush and Bleeding Cool; I believe that Teenage Magazine is one of the most popular youth magazines in Singapore and Capital FM is one of the top 5 most popular radio stations in the UK. Kept Dailymotion as I kind find an alternative source for the nomination.
  • Conde Nast is included as the publisher in GQ refs but the other ones do not use the publisher parameter. This should be consistent.
  • Jon Caramanica should have an author link in ref 20.
  • There is usage of both Recording Industry Association of Japan and RIAJ in the publisher parameter in references. This should be consistently one or the other.
  • Billboard should be italicized in the title of ref 65.
  • Cumulative sales counts combining numbers from different chart issues are generally not allowed. A source directly stating the 3,795,02 sales figure would be required.

First-timer's spotchecks

  • These refs are dead: Ref 13 (Don't Bore Us), Ref 38 (Dailymotion), Ref 103 (Teenage Magazine). Refs 48-55 and most of the links in ref 128 redirect to the Circle Chart homepage. They should be marked as dead so people clicking on them are taken to the archives.
  • No close paraphrasing or source-text integrity issues found.--NØ 20:04, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed all. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 22:19, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, looks fine source review-wise. I have changed the date format to mdy consistently. If dmy or some other format should be followed according to the Korean system then let me know.--NØ 16:28, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Aoba47

[edit]

I was asked to do a review for this FAC on my talk page (here). I had initially refused as I did not have the time to do so, but I have freed up some time now. I will post a full review later on, but before I do that I have a few quick comments first:

  • Do you have an answer for Ippantekina's question about File:2NE1 I Am the Best cover.jpg as I have a similar concern about that.
  • I do not see the value in either of the images used in the "In popular culture" section. They seem more decorative than anything.
  • I have a comment on this sentence: (In 2021, CL revealed that the song had originally featured Canadian singer Justin Bieber.) It is just awkward placed at the end of the section as its own paragraph. This information should be integrated into the prose.
  • Just adding more context does not address my point. It is just randomly tacked-on at the end of the section. It should go in a spot that makes more sense, and it just comes across as random to have it brought up after the paragraph about the song's composition. Aoba47 (talk) 02:57, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a suggestion on where this could be moved to?
  • Lee Kyung-joon and Jason Robert are only mentioned in the "Credits" section, when they should also be discussed in the prose. I would also link mixing in both contexts as it is music jargon that some readers may be unfamiliar with.
  • I'd revise this part, (but only peaked at number 37 on the RIAJ Digital Track Chart and number 53 on the Billboard Japan Hot 100) as it is putting an opinion in Wikipedia's voice. This part is setting up an apparent contrast between the certification and these chart positions and emphasizing them as low when that seems more like an opinion than fact. This is pertaining specifically to the "but only" word choice, which I would remove and revise with something else instead.
  • For the "Awards" section, I would remove the table and present all the information as prose. Look at song FAs like "Your Power" and "Blank Space" which present this information as prose to see what I mean.
  • For this part, (starting with Bom's solo track "Don't Cry" on April 21 and leading up to a new mini-album), Bom's full name should be used since this is the first time she is mentioned in the article. Also, the prose should identify who is she in relation to 2NE1.
Fixed
  • There is an instance in the second paragraph of the "Background and composition" section where four citations are used so I would consider citation bundling to avoid citation overkill.
  • This part, (An empowerment anthem, its lyrics explore), is grammatically incorrect as it is calling the lyrics an empowerment anthem, not the song. The same is true for this part, (An empowerment anthem, the lyrics revolve), in the lead.
  • These parts are still not grammatically correct. Changing these parts to "the song's lyrics" does not change the problem. The beginning, dependent clause/description (An empowerment anthem) will apply to whatever is in the subject position and that is still lyrics so both sentences are calling the lyrics an empowerment anthem still. Aoba47 (talk) 02:57, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Reworded
  • I have a comment on this part, (became one of the few non-English songs to have received airplay on American radio stations). This just does not seem true to me as I would have imagined by this point Spanish-language songs would have already received airplay on American radio stations.

I hope these comments are helpful. Apologies that they are all over the place. These are things I have noticed while doing a quick look through the article, but I will do a more thorough reading once everything has been addressed above. I just wanted to make sure that I had reserved my spot in this FAC. Aoba47 (talk) 22:44, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed all; as for the single cover, there is a OTRS verification ticket attached to the file. I kept the images in the pop. culture section as I believe the commercials (particularly the Microsoft ones) are a major part of the song's impact internationally. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 02:43, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the clarification about the image. I still do not think the other images are helpful. I just do not see how the image of the computer or the car help to further illustrate the point about this song being used in the commercials. I have left responses above. Aoba47 (talk) 02:57, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would link mini-album as readers may not be familiar with this concept. Also, why is 2NE1 marked as an EP and not a mini-album? I am curious because it has mini-album in one of its titles.
    • In K-pop, the terms mini-album and EP are used synonymously, but I removed mentions of mini-album in the prose as the term is not as recognizable outside K-pop.
  • I would separate the last sentence of the lead's second paragraph. It runs a tad long. I think it would benefit from breaking into two sentences.
  • This part, (elaborate sets, props, attire and hairstyles with unconventional aesthetics), is rather vague. The article goes into more detail and mentions things like glam punk, and I think it would be best to be more descriptive here while also being brief as this is the lead.
  • At the start of the "Background and composition" section, I have noticed a repetition of "new" in ("a new series of singles", "new mini-album", "promote a new single"). I am not sure this is necessary as I would imagine readers would assume that the group would be releasing new music as opposed to re-releasing old songs/albums. I would remove "new" from these instances.
  • It is unclear who is saying this information: (it would be a more intense song, with a quick tempo (combining electronic music and hip-hop), and was intended to be more intense and familiar to the youth who are used to clubbing culture.)
  • For this part, (They reunited for the mini-album's second single), it is not clear why "reunited" is used. Was the group separated prior to this song's release?
  • The prose in this part, (and was intended to be more intense and familiar to the youth who are used to clubbing culture) reads awkwardly to me.
  • The following quote ("opposite vibe") should be clearly attributed in the prose as it is not clear who is saying this.
  • For this part, (the song has been described as a powerful, energetic, self-confident anthem), it is unclear who is describing the song in this way.
  • The article says that electro house, electronic and hip hop are musical influences, but they are presented in the lead and the infobox as the actual genre. For genre, the citation would need to explicitly describe the song as the genre. Influences do not count.
  • For this part, (A Rolling Stone article noted), the author's name should be used.
  • I would be mindful of using too many quotes. I notice that this in the first paragraph of the "Critical response" section. I would avoid one-word quotes like "show-stopping", "manic", and "larger-than-life" as they can actually take away from the other quotes.
  • I am uncertain if "In popular culture" is the best section name. I am not sure what I would replace it with though.

I am sorry, but I oppose this FAC on the basis of the prose. As I read the article more and more, I am noticing more and more spots where I do not think the prose meets 1a of the Wikipedia:Featured article criteria. Apologies again as I appreciate the time and work you have put into this article, but I do not think it is ready to be a FA or for a FAC in its current state. Aoba47 (talk) 03:19, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Addressed your points. Can you point out the spots in the prose that needs adjustments? I don't really feel like the prose is at a point where its so badly written, but there may be places where it needs fixing. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 03:58, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies, but I must decline that request. I feel that listing out individual examples will just lead to a fix loop and I do not think that would be productive. I stand by my assessment that I do not think the prose is on the level expected of a FA. Two editors have supported this FAC for promotion so it may be the case that if this FAC gets more attention that a consensus may still be reached to promote even with my oppose. Aoba47 (talk) 15:43, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by FrB.TG

[edit]

Hello, Nkon21, and welcome to FAC.

  • "...featuring synthesizers and Middle Eastern inspired riffs." - there should be a hyphen after "Eastern" since "Middle Eastern" and "inspired" are working together as a compound adjective to describe the type of riffs.
  • "Various publications recognized it as an important work in the spread of the Korean wave around the world and has been ranked amongst the top K-pop works of the decade and all time." The second part (the song) of the sentence has a different subject than the first ("various publications"), but it currently reads as if "various publications ... has been ranked.." To solve this, I would add an "it" before "has been".
  • Apologies for butting in, but I take responsibility for that part. I had edited that part in the lead (in this edit) to avoid having two sentences in a row start with "It is/It was". I just wanted to clarify this as it is my fault. Aoba47 (talk) 18:12, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "It was commercially successful in the group's native country, achieving the number one position on the Gaon Digital Chart." This is too verbose. "It was commercially successful in South Korea, reaching number one on the Gaon Digital Chart." also does the job with fewer words.
  • "The song was subsequently released in the United States on December 10, 2014 by Capitol Records and became one of the few Korean-language songs to have received airplay on American radio stations." - "subsequently" is redundant and the word "song" is repeated twice in close proximity.

Oppose. While I appreciate your commendable efforts to enhance the article's overall quality, I must express concern about the prose not meeting the FA standards. A quick scan of the lead paragraph reveals grammatical issues and sentences with complex structures, making them challenging to read. I recommend seeking assistance from an FAC regular or utilizing the resources available at WP:GOCE for copy-editing. Additionally, a peer review might be beneficial to bring the article up to the desired FA standards, as addressing these issues may not be feasible within the FAC process. Might I also suggest seeking the involvement of a mentor? FrB.TG (talk) 16:07, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]


  • I am sorry, but with two well-argued and adamant opposes it is clear that the article is not going to achieve a consensus to promote within the sort of timescale FAC requires. I am going to archive this and suggest Nkon21 take up the advice is FrB.TG's closing comments. The usual two-week hiatus will apply. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:00, 16 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/I_Am_the_Best/archive1&oldid=1180493020"