Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mindful (song)/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 Hog Farm via FACBot (talk) 18 March 2022 [1].

Mindful (song)

[edit]
Nominator(s): Aoba47 (talk) 04:56, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Mindful" is a promotional single from K. Michelle's third studio album More Issues Than Vogue (2016). It is hip-hop and R&B song in which Michelle raps and warns critics to be mindful of her. The song does not take itself seriously and instead has a more fun approach, as reflected in its colorful music video set in a trailer park. Although "Mindful" did not chart anywhere, it always stuck out to me for whatever reason.

I brought this article to GA status in 2018, but I ended up rewriting it earlier this year. I was on the fence about whether or not it would be the best fit for the FAC space, but I have decided to just try and see what happens. This is actually my third FAC nomination in a row for a song article (after "No Panties" and "Laundromat"). I would greatly appreciate any feedback. Thank you in advance for any comments. I am taking a minor break from Wikipedia as I have started a new job, but I will be more than capable to respond to everything on here in a timely fashion. Aoba47 (talk) 04:56, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]

Comments by FrB.TG

[edit]

Placeholder, leaving comments soon. FrB.TG (talk) 19:18, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My comments:

  • "Throughout the track, Michelle raps the lyrics and warns critics to be mindful of her." You should probably place mindful inside quotation marks considering it's not only part of the title but is also included in the lyrics.
  • "It was made available as a digital download;[4][5] one of these downloads had" - "download(s)" within a close proximity.
  • "Seriah Buckler summarized the video as being about" → "Seriah Buckler summarized that the video was about"
  • "Throughout "Mindful", Michelle warns critics and "hoes" to be mindful around her." Same as my first point (if the suggestion is adapted).
  • "In an article for Revolt, Seriah Buckler wrote that she "rides the beat like a seasoned lyricist", and described the song as "laden with raw bars and a flow that your favorite rapper couldn’t carry"." There's a curly apostrophe in "couldn't", which should be replaced with a straight one per MoS.

That's my lot. FrB.TG (talk) 16:30, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support - good work as always. FrB.TG (talk) 23:35, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from ChrisTheDude

[edit]
  • I'd be tempted to say "Atlantic Records" rather than just "Atlantic"
  • "and she cited it was one of the first times" => "and she stated that it was one of the first times"
  • That does look better so I have revised it into the article. For whatever reason, I started getting into a kick of using "cited" so I need to be more aware of that habit. Aoba47 (talk) 20:14, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Seriah Buckler summarized the video being about" => "Seriah Buckler summarized the video as being about"
  • In the caption of the audio clip, the first sentence appears to end with a comma
  • In the music and lyrics section we have both "hoes" and "hos". The first appears to be a direct quote so that's presumably how the original author spelt it, but what about the second?
  • Both sources actually use the "hoes" spelling for some reason. I would not have any issue going with hos. I have seen it spelled both ways. What are your thoughts on it? Before I change it though, I wanted to check in with you about it. I do not have a strong preference either way. Aoba47 (talk) 20:14, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @ChrisTheDude: Thank you for the response. I had actually missed the "hos" spelling so apologies for that I have checked the Azzopardi source and he does use the "hos" spelling. I agree with you with keeping the spelling if it is a quote so I would likely keep both spellings. Apologies for the oversight on my part and I hope that clears it up. Aoba47 (talk) 22:01, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @ChrisTheDude: Thank you for the review as always. I have addressed all of your points, except for the last one which I left a response/question about it. Let me know if there is anything else I can do to improve the article further and have a great rest of your week! Aoba47 (talk) 20:14, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Pseud 14

[edit]
  • In which they work together in a recording studio.[2] – I think “work” should be past tense
  • It was one of four videos to promote More Issues Than Vogue – in this third paragraph, I think you can refer to it as “album” instead, since it has been mentioned in full in the previous 2 paragraphs.
  • Critics contrasted the single with Michelle's past songs and albums. – I think “Critics have compared the single with Michelle’s past songs and albums” is a better word choice IMO.
  • A reviewer for Rap-Up and Danny Schwartz of HotNewHipHop – since there is no specific writer for the first and Schwartz is mentioned again in the next sentence, perhaps we you can start with the publication instead, e.g. "Rap-Up described mindful as… , while HotNewHipHop writer/critic Danny Schwartz wrote …
  • Revised for the most part. I am hesitant on just Rap-Up because I do attribute the writer (if known) in the prose and I would like to keep that consistent even if the reviewer is unknown, but that is just my preference. Aoba47 (talk) 23:18, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bill Chenevert highlighted the song as "outstanding" and a "blast" – “complimented or praised” the song calling it “outstanding” and a “blast”, would be better word choices for this line. Since you also used praised in the next sentence, you can switch it up so it’s not repetitive.
  • Also in the second paragraph of Critical Reception, praise is repeated. Suggest alternative wording.

That's it from me. Another wonderful work on a song article. Pseud 14 (talk) 19:49, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source review – Pending

[edit]

Will do soon. Aza24 (talk) 01:05, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting
  • Technically the "other" parameter (in the AV refs) is not supposed to be used when there is no author listed, so that's why you might see a green error when you preview an edit. This isn't a huge deal, since the error notices aren't visible to normal readers, but if you want to add like "author=Atlantic Records" that might be an option
  • Formatting is otherwise great—us usual :)
Reliability
  • I'm a little considered about Idolator, how can they be considered 'high quality'?
  • That is a good question. I ended up removing this source as upon further research and reflection, I do not believe it is a high-quality source for a featured article. This removal actually opened up a pretty major concern about the article, which I will raise below. Aoba47 (talk) 04:33, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I find a similar issue with HotNewHipHop
  • HotNewHipHop has evidence of editorial oversight on their website's staff page (here), and the website has been used in the articles by reliable sources, including BET, Complex, Out, and Yahoo!. I would say that this is an example of how context matters. I would consider it a high-quality source for hip-hop articles. Aoba47 (talk) 04:33, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Verifiability
  • Thank you for your review. I actually ran into an issue while removing the Idolator source. That was the only article I could find that explicitly named "Mindful" a promotional single. Other publications just call it a single, and the music video has an opening card that places the "Mindful" single cover alongside those for proper singles. I have found that the line between single and promotional single can be quite murky so I will need to do further research on the subject. For that reason, I would actually like to withdraw this nomination as I think this work would be best done outside of the FAC space.
  • I also ran across a helpful review from Renowned for Sound that I somehow missed while re-writing the article so I would also want to do another web search to make sure other reviews did not slip through the cracks as well. Pinging @FAC coordinators: to let them know about my withdrawal request. Aoba47 (talk) 04:33, 18 March 2022 (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/Mindful_(song)/archive1&oldid=1077931078"