Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Open Arms (SZA 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 promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 4 October 2023 [1].

Open Arms (SZA song)

[edit]
Nominator(s): ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ ‍ 💬 "Will you call me?"
📝 "Will you hang me out to dry?" 13:52, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you gotta go
I guess it's time to go
I gotta let you go
To FAC you go, to FAC you go

Since the two musicians who performed this song—SZA and Travis Scott―recently released another collaboration, I figured it'd be a good of a time as any to nominate one of their previous songs together. It includes a voice recording of SZA's deceased grandmother, which is a heartwarming gesture! Enjoy the article, everyone :) ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ ‍ 💬 "Will you call me?"
📝 "Will you hang me out to dry?" 13:52, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from MyCatIsAChonk

[edit]
  • The song begins with a voice clip of Norma Rowe—SZA's grandmother... - instead of a dash, I think using a comma would be better, something like "The song begins with a voice clip of Norma Rowe, who is SZA's..."
    • Fair, but I'd leave out "who is" for concisions
  • Like Scott, Rowe's vocals prominently featured in Ctrl; - add "are" before prominently
    • Not done; the sentence is in the past tense to signify Rowe's history of having her voice in SZA's songs
  • Wl foil
    • Done
  • A solo version of "Open Arms"... - are there multiple solo versions? Otherwise, use "the" instead of "a".
    • It is entirely within the realm of possibility that SZA recorded several demos/takes of the song that would become "Open Arms", and those technically count as versions . the use of the "a" article instead of "the" is to lean on the safe side and accountfor that possibility
  • Note 5 could just be replaced with the Atwood Magazine ref, and include the quote in the quote parameter
  • No citations in the "Credits" section? I'd imagine something similar to the short sentence in Title (song)#Credits and personnel
    • There is now !

Earwig shows no violations, and the sources look reliable and correctly formatted. Very nice work, Your Power! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 15:50, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for stopping by and reviewing one of my articles, @MyCatIsAChonk! Sorry for the delays; dealing with a lot of irl stuff so my focus is scattered at the moment . Hope your queries have been sufficiently answered. ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ ‍ 💬 "Will you call me?"
📝 "Will you hang me out to dry?" 09:32, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 13:00, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Aoba47

[edit]
  • For the lead, I would shorten sentimental ballad to ballad as that is the more common wordage used.
    • Shortened
  • I think this part, (with lyrics about realizing to leave a former partner to whom the other person has been devoted because it has become harmful for their self-esteem), would improve from further revision as I find that it reads rather awkwardly.
    • Point taken
  • I have a suggestion for the last two sentences of the lead's first paragraph. I think it would be better to combine the part about this being the only SOS track with SZA's grandmother with the sentence on her vocals on CTRL as that would make the significance more obvious.
    • Done !
  • Why not present Ctrl as CTRL? From my understanding, it is presented in all caps and it would match SOS.
    • Most sources do not spell the title in all caps; Ctrl is a play on the "ctrl" keyboard on many PCs, which is itself usually spelled not in all caps
  • I have a comment for this sentence: ("Open Arms" marks Scott and SZA's fourth collaboration—a previous one was "Love Galore" (2017), the second single from Ctrl.) Why only list one of the four collaborations? It puts in my opinion undue weight on one of the four songs so I would either list all four or just say they had four collaborations without listing any. I am leaning toward the latter as the former could be very wordy.
  • For this part, (Many contemporary critics focused on), I would just say critics. It is unnecessary to qualify what type of critics as there is not any other type of reception to confuse it with (i.e. like retrospective reviews).
    • Excised, for both
  • I think the ballad link should be moved up to this part, (a balladic, soft, or heartfelt sound), since it comes first in the article.
    • Removed the part you mentioned; the link would be kept
  • I have a clarification question about this sentence: (Apart from the "traditional" R&B that had been a staple of SZA's past works, many tracks had a balladic, soft, or heartfelt sound.) It implies a division between "traditional" R&B and music with balladic, soft, heartfelt sound, when I think songs can be both. I am just not fully grasping the contrast here. Maybe attributing who is saying this would be clearer and tie it less to Wikipedia's voice and to a person's opinion.
    • no RS says "Open Arms" is R&B, so i thought in my head maybe i should contrast the two sounds in discussion to prepare viewers for how "Open Arms" would be sonically , but u make a good point that the two arent mutually exclusive . perhaps "acoustic vs. R&B" is a better contrast to make
  • For this part, (collaborated a few times beforehand), use the exact number of collaborations they have done as it is known.
  • When discussing "Ok Alright", I would clarify that it appears on Rodeo. It is the only one of the collaborations listed that is not attributed to an album, and it would help readers like myself who are unfamiliar with either artist to find out more context on this particular song.
    • Done both
  • For the images in the "Lyrics" section, I would clarify in the photo captions the year the images were taken.
    • I feel like writing (left, 2017) or (right, 2019) would be too clunky from a reader perspective
      • I disagree to be honest, but I will leave that up to the image reviewer. Adding in the year would only help readers as it is unclear in the current format if the photos were taken around the time the song was recorded/released or much earlier. I think that kind of context is valuable to readers. Aoba47 (talk) 17:37, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        • Seems like Nikki, the media reviewer below, took no issue with it .
  • I have a question about point of view character. Would it be possible to simplify that to narrator?
    • Good thinking . that definitely couldve been more concisely put
  • Would a link to ride-or-die chick for "ride-or-die" be beneficial? I could see some readers not fully understanding it.
    • definitely ! I had the same instinct with "backshots"
  • The article says that Scott was the focus of critical reviews, and I was just curious if any reviews talked about SZA at all?
    • technically ? No doubt people will comment on her contributions, such as her voice—it is her song after all—but from what I understand, more critics, as cited in the article, prioritised Scott
  • I am uncertain of the relevance of the Midnights paragraph. To be clear, I am not saying to delete it or anything. I just do not fully see the connection between this song and the bonus material released to seemingly compete with Midnights, particularly when the Uproxx article names the other song ("PSA") in its headline over the solo version of this song. Again, not asking you to remove it, but I wanted to get more of your opinion on its inclusion here.
    • I believe it sets the scene for why the solo version of "Open Arms" got an official release in the first place . Saying it was included as part of an album edition with bonus tracks is one thing , and i would have left it at that in the article if that was the case! however , considering the web-exclusive was a surprise release and, despite its bonus tracks, decidedly not the deluxe version that SZA would tease later, there has to be something more to the situation . Thus it feels worth mentioning IMO that the "Open Arms" solo version was released alongside "PSA" to compete with Midnights sales as per Rolling Stone . As you might know these kinds of tactics happen all the time in the music industry (e.g. when Swift released "Anti-Hero" remixes right as Drake's "Rich Flex" was predicted to go #1, making it debut at #2 instead) ; that RS came to this conclusion is not surprising . Sorry for the long ramble—the issue is more nuanced than it seems at first glance, so I feel it warranted a response that lived up to that!
      • No need to apologize. I appreciate it and that clarifies things further for me. That makes complete sense to me. Thank you for taking the time to explain this matter. Aoba47 (talk) 17:37, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Elements from the "Credits" section should be represented in the prose as well. For instance, the studios are not mentioned in the prose and individuals like Dale Becker and Katie Harvey are not mentioned in the prose either.

Wonderful work on this article. I have never heard of this song before, but I still found the article to be very engaging and informative. I hope my comments are helpful and once everything has been addressed, I will read through the article a few more times just to make sure I do my due diligence as a reviewer. Best of luck with this FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 20:35, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Aoba47: I'm glad we met again, and thank you for your review! Everything is, as always helpful, but that's no surprise coming from such a prolific reviewer :) sorry for the week-long delay! Let me know if I've addressed everything. ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ ‍ 💬 "Will you call me?"
📝 "Will you hang me out to dry?" 11:57, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for addressing everything. I support this FAC for promotion based on the prose. Aoba47 (talk) 15:01, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Media review

[edit]
@Nikkimaria: i haven't , but i have added one because it proved useful ! thank you for the review :) ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ ‍ 💬 "Will you call me?"
📝 "Will you hang me out to dry?" 11:57, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay - would suggest expanding the fair-use rationale a bit. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:21, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikkimaria: I did my best to add further substance while keeping things concise. ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ ‍ 💬 "Will you call me?"
📝 "Will you hang me out to dry?" 09:39, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from Gerald Waldo Luis

[edit]

Hey there! Really great to see you in another FAC again ^_^ I'm gonna do some prose checks, then maybe a source review if no one would step in. GeraldWL 05:06, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from GeraldWL 03:50, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
* "Featuring vocals from American rapper Travis Scott, the song is a sentimental ballad"-- I think "the song" can be changed to "it", since one sentence ago there's already a mention of "the song", thus being repetitive.
    • Made a workaround
  • Link studio album
    • It is a term commonly used enough in music articles and in general that doing so would run afoul of WP:OVERLINK
  • "Rowe's vocals featured prominently" --> "Rowe's vocals had been featured prominently"
    • This would work if the preceding sentence was in simple past tense—thereby necessitating the use of past perfect tense as you suggest—but that sentence was in present tense, so nothing should be changed
  • "fourth collaboration—a previous one was" -- "a previous one" just sounds awkward when read, I suggest "fourth collaboration, with the previous being"
    • I removed this one entirely because whatever the previous collab was is irrelevant
  • "a few" sounds too specific, "some" gives a broader sense of scope
    • Sure
  • Perhaps a genre section in the infobox will be great?
    • No source gave it an explicit genre so no
      • Sentimental ballad and/or R&B? As described in your prose.
        • 1) sentimental ballad is not a genre, merely an "emotional style of music" as stated in our article for it. 2) once again, no source described it as R&B --- see the Music and production section
  • Link studio album
    • See above
  • The "R&B" is linked to contemporary R&B, so shouldn't it be written such too?
    • No. That would be a mouthful. As well, since we live in Contemporary Times(tm) we have to link readers to the R&B more commonplace nowadays. I think there will be no harm done to readers in piping the link.
  • "confessional nature of its songwriting" should probably change "its" to "her" for clarity, and assuming SZA doesnt use it pronouns.
    • Changed to "the"
  • Link DJ or maybe use the longer term disc jockey for clarity
  • "yet incorporated in her discography"-- maybe link to SZA discography?
    • I removed that part of the article, so the suggestion is moot now
  • "or in her words, "a little bit of everything""-- this is kinda redundant, as "an amalgamation of various disparate musical styles" means you already paraphrased her statement, I don't feel like it adds any emphasis like other quotes do.
    • Not really
  • Link sentimental ballad, then unlink the one in the next section
    • Fixed the linking issue
  • "sent their verses"-- does this mean like SZA requested them to maybe help with the songwriting?
    • Well yes sort of . Sending your verses to somebody means you hop as a feature on the song
  • I feel as though paragraph 1&2, and paragraph 3&4, can be combined since they concern the same topic, and I don't see why it is broken down.
    • Doubt it ? Paragraph #1 concerns SZA's debut album and how it drummed up anticipation for the next one, #2 SZA's gradual revealing of what the album would be like, #3 collaborators, #4 SZA's history with Scott . These are themes disparate enough to be divided into paragraphs the way it currently does.
      • I'm gonna check this on Monday, am only able to edit on App rn and am too lazy to go back and forth thru article lol.
        • Okay
  • Shouldn't "Black" be decapitalized?
    • WP:RACECAPS tells us both are acceptable as long as the capitalization is consistent with all races mentioned in the article to avoid othering marginalised groups
  • Link black music
  • "finger-picked guitar"-- maybe add the "acoustic" bit?
    • Fixed
  • "Scott performs with a gentle rap cadence. He uses his lower register, and his vocals are digitally manipulated using Auto-Tune." Should this be in past tense, since production was in past tense? I feel more strongly on the "and his vocals are digitally manipulated using Auto-Tune" part.
    • The song's sound and production is a fixed fact of the song regardless of time, and as such, said facts should be presented in present tense
      • I'd argue that the song's production specifically had already happened. It's like preferring "Spielberg wrote Jaws" in lieu of "Spielberg writes Jaws".
        • It's not really a good analogy---a better one would be "Spielberg wrote Jaws" to "Rob Bisel produced Open Arms"---plus this is more a matter of tense consistency
  • The — in the third para is kind of awkward following the ref; I think a comma can do.
    • True. another person brought it up
  • ""fuck on [her] ex""-- can't this be paraphrased to like, idk, "have sex with her ex"? Lmao-- plus it rhymes.
  • "welcome the other person" --> "welcome each other"
  • "By the end, however," with a comma after end.
    • Done all three
  • "sometime next month" --> "sometime the following month"
    • Not done . Current iteration is more concise
  • "Out of 23 songs, "Open Arms" appears as the 20th track" -- should prob be consistent between "songs" or "tracks"
    • This distinction is okay and not a case of WP:ELEVAR I would argue . When talking about a song that's on an album, we call it a track . Using "track" therefore makes sense
  • "third verse and praising him and" --> "third verse, praising him and"
  • Link slow jam
    • Done
  • "Variety's A. D. Amorosi and the Los Angeles Times's Mikael Wood found the composition of "grand and gorgeous" quality; Amorosi in particular deemed Scott the song's centerpiece." You could prob push both refs to the last sentence, I feel like using the same ref twice in one sentence feels weird when there's an alternative.
    • Disagree. Any given quotation must have the relevant citation included directly after it
  • "and Mendez"-- the "Mendez" is repetitive
    • ? I don't like using "former" and "latter" in articles; this is a matter of personal style
  • "XXL reported some people believed his verse was unnecessary: "'SZA is pouring her heart out in a song & here come Travis Scott talking about backshots... men will never be serious people,' typed one disappointed listener."" Are audience reactions merited here? because the section concerns critical reception, and WP has been very icky about audience responses.
    • I do think it'd be safe to remove it
  • The tracking week ending January 6, 2023, marked SOS's fourth week atop the Billboard 200 albums chart." What does "tracking week" mean?
    • What it says on the tin - starting Friday, Billboard tracks how songs or albums perform commercially for 7 days for one chart issue, then they publish the chart on Saturday of next week.
  • Could prob put a dot after the sentence
    • What sentence
      • The Credits adapted from liner notes bit.
        • Periods don't punctuate phrases
  • "Granny – lead vocals" -- isn't it more efficient to just write the full name? Feel free to correct me, since I'm not an expert in song articles, if perhaps copying the liner notes word-for-word is the requirement
    • That's how Rowe is credited in the liner notes, and we have to adhere to that
      • Aight
  • A portal bar or box would be a fun little addition to the notes or down under the navboxes :)
    • I don't know what you are talking about .
      • Never mind, just a tiny comment, but not really affecting anything.

Welcome back @Gerald Waldo Luis! Haven't seen you around in a while , which makes me delighted to see you again . I hope all your concerns have been answered sufficiently . Have a great week! ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ ‍ 💬 "Will you call me?"
📝 "Will you hang me out to dry?" 14:06, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for replying to my not-so-constructive criticism lmao! Really glad to see you are still active and growing here on WP. I put a couple more replies, and if those are all resolved I'll give a support! Also if you're interested and in the mood for 100b articles, I have peer review up for To Fly! which is still lacking responses. GeraldWL 16:06, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Gerald Waldo Luis: it's okay not really salty about it . most were reasonable . but I'm afraid I can't do any more wikipedia work for a long while after this #idk so apologies for declining your PR offer. I'll explain in my talk page, but trust me it is a lot. Thanks again for your comments. It means the world and then some. ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ ‍ 💬 "Will you call me?"
📝 "Will you hang me out to dry?" 16:36, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Source review

[edit]

Reviewing this version, spot-check only upon request and usual caveat about me not knowing the topic that much. What makes okayplayer and thelineofbestfit a reliable source? Source information and formatting seem to be consistent. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:20, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: thank you for the review. Okayplayer lists their masthead in their about page. Combined with a glance at a random sample of their recent articles, which don't reveal any bad journalism practise/language, it's safe to say they're reliable for this enwiki article. Wrt to Best Fit, Metacritic includes them in their list of approved publications that reviewed SOS. Spotcheck would be appreciated. ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ ‍ 💬 "Will you call me?"
📝 "Will you hang me out to dry?" 01:35, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
'fraid a spotcheck will have to wait until tomorrow. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:44, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Spotcheck
[edit]

Of this URL:

Quite some deviations from the sources, but since this isn't a topic I know well I'll see what the nominators/others have to say. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:28, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Replies have been made. Thanks to @Jo-Jo Eumerus for the spotcheck and to @Gerald Waldo Luis for responding on my behalf while I was away. ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ ‍ 💬 "Will you call me?"
📝 "Will you hang me out to dry?" 05:34, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jo-Jo Eumerus ? ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ ‍ 💬 "Will you call me?"
📝 "Will you hang me out to dry?" 00:22, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to ask for copies of the sources I called "inaccessible", if possible. Say per email, I'd like to verify these as well. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:07, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jo-Jo Eumerus: the Vulture sources you pointed out can be accessed through archive links. As for the ARIA report, this website compiles every song that entered the ARIA chart in 2022, so you can check the peaks there. Alternatively, you can ask the person who contributes to adding chart peaks to many articles, @Ss112, since they likely are subscribed to the weekly charts. ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ ‍ 💬 "Will you call me?"
📝 "Will you hang me out to dry?" 23:12, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Jo-Jo, what's the state of play with this one? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:11, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Need the source enumerated under #46 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:16, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your Power ? Gog the Mild (talk) 12:46, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Gog the Mild: I'm trying my best to find that ARIA source ... I already linked this as an alternative - this website keeps tabs on several ARIA chart archives, so I'm not sure why this was considered in the meantime? ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ ‍ 💬 "Will you call me?"
📝 "Will you hang me out to dry?" 07:00, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you are suggesting that the change you have already made may be sufficient, you need to ping Jo-Jo. They are the source reviewer. If you are still searching and failing, you need to consider alternatives, this is dragging on a bit now. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:43, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have emailed ARIA to see if they're kind enough to provide an excerpt of the thing. GeraldWL 04:09, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jo-Jo Eumerus, I just received an email from ARIA providing an excerpt of the cited page to confirm the info. I extracted it to Google Docs: here. GeraldWL 04:19, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also pinging @FAC coordinators: since this should solve everything and an easy pass. GeraldWL 06:23, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK, this is a pass on my end, then. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:29, 4 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/Open_Arms_(SZA_song)/archive1&oldid=1180051828"