Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Melodrama (Lorde album)/archive1
Melodrama is the second studio album by New Zealand singer Lorde, released through Universal, Lava and Republic Records on 16 June 2017. A departure from the minimalist style of her debut album Pure Heroine (2013), it is a pop and electropop record incorporating piano instrumentation and maximalist electronic beats. It was primarily written and produced by Lorde and Jack Antonoff, with production input by several high-profile producers including Frank Dukes, Flume, Malay, S1 and Joel Little. Melodrama has been described as a loose concept album that explores the theme of solitude.
_(cropped).jpg)
- Contributor(s): De88
Every article on this topic now meets the GA criteria. --De88 (talk) 04:26, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support: Looks like the album, all the tracks, and the tour. There doesn't appear to be a concert film or anything else like that. The're all linked by a navbox template, and they share a super-category. I think it's good to go! Good work! -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 12:39, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
- Comments:
Remove "Pretty Much Amazing" sources as it is a "music blog started in 2008 and maintained by Daniel, a self-proclaimed music nerd." It is featured on most of the articles.On the song, "The Louvre" there are no wikilinks on the references. That also applies to other aticles such as "Hard Feelings/Loveless", which doesn't have wikilinks to "The Line of Best Fit", "New York Times" and so on...give a good glance at it on the other articles as well.On the aforementioned song the "Pigeons and Planes" source redirects to a broken link affiliated with Complex. All in all, despite the notability of the articles above being shown I have serious doubts regarding "Writer in the Dark" as it doesn't pass WP:NS since "Coverage of a song in the context of an album review does not establish notability." Moreover, it fails the three factors listed in the wikipage.MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 00:00, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- @MarioSoulTruthFan: If I recall correctly, Pretty Much Amazing is one of the sources that Metacritic uses to compile their aggregate scores. I was under the assumption that this site had some credibility to its name. Also, are wikilinks in the citation necessary? I have seen many GAs only wikilink when mentioning the source in the body, not the citation itself. I went ahead and nominated "Writer in the Dark" for deletion. De88 (talk) 14:56, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- @MarioSoulTruthFan and De88: IMO, this is not a place to discuss whether or not "Writer in the Dark" is notable. The entry is currently a Good article and that's what matters in this discussion. If MarioSoulTruthFan thinks the subject is not notable then they should have submitted a deletion nomination. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:32, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- De88 I guess not every site in the aggregater is a reliable source? I mean it says it is a "blog" and I can't find anything on the editor online, like if he has worked for other publications or so. I have never seen that? They wikilink in the body and minimum once in the references. Another Believer this is the place to discuss it since it is part of the good topic nomination. The nominator and creator of the article did it for me. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 22:43, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- @MarioSoulTruthFan: From the website itself:
Pretty Much Amazing is a music blog started in 2008 and maintained by Daniel, a self-proclaimed music nerd. PMA was once called “the true keepers of serendipity” in The New Yorker. MTV considered PMA one of the “best independent music blogs,” and “a blog you should know.” The Toronto Star very kindly described PMA as “indispensable,” and the New York Post said Pretty Much Amazing was “one of those little website crumbs of deliciousness [we] visit every morning.” PMA used to be a daily publication. In 2020, this site will exist as an archive to more than 11,000 posts on music, including over 1,000 album reviews. New content will still be published...
Pretty Much Amazing
- The site clearly has been recognised by other established publications. Does that not warrant some notability? If Metacritic, a website cited frequently in Wikipedia articles, recognises PMA as a valid source for gauging their aggregate scores, then I do not see why it cannot be used here as well.
- @MarioSoulTruthFan: No, this is the place to discuss if these Good articles add up to a Good topic. They do. Your issues with specific articles are independent, and even if "Writer in the Dark" is deleted, this will still be a group of Good articles collected as a possible Good topic. ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:46, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- Another Believer I never said it wouldn't be a good topic. People have the right to comment here trying to improve the articles. I guess you might have some point regarding PMA website. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 10:06, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
- @MarioSoulTruthFan: Critiques of individual articles aside, do you support the Good topic promotion? ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:07, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
Update: "Writer in the Dark" has survived AfD. ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:48, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support. This is not the place for MarioSoulTruthFan to gripe about specific articles. ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:47, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support per nom, not the place for such a discussion. MPJ-DK (talk) 15:22, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
- Closed with a consensus to promote to Good Topic - GamerPro64 01:37, 19 October 2020 (UTC)