Talk:Clap Clap (song)
(Redirected from Talk:Clap Clap (Gran Error, Elvana Gjata and Antonia song))
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Theleekycauldron in topic Did you know nomination
Clap Clap (song) has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: December 1, 2022. (Reviewed version). |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Clap Clap (song) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Did you know nomination
edit- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: rejected by Theleekycauldron (talk) 19:23, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
( )
- ... that B. Gorani from RTV21 wrote in a review of "Clap Clap" that "if you listen to it, you will not be able to remain passive, since the rhythm will keep you dancing"? Source: https://rtv21.tv/publikohet-bashkepunimi-i-elvana-gjates-me-kengetaren-rumune-antonia/
Improved to Good Article status by Iaof2017 (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 21:02, 3 December 2022 (UTC).
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook eligibility:
- Cited: - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
- Interesting:
- Other problems: - The hook is interesting, but I suggest rewriting it slightly for flow.
QPQ: Done. |
Overall: Interesting article! Assuming good faith on the Albanian-language source, though as I noted above the hook could be rewritten slightly for flow. May I suggest the following: ALT1: ... that if you listen to "Clap Clap", "you will not be able to remain passive, since the rhythm will keep you dancing"? Other than the suggested hook revision, the nomination should be good to go! --Sky Harbor (talk) 17:13, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Hi, Onegreatjoke! Any thoughts please on the hook so we can close this nomination? --Sky Harbor (talk) 20:04, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Sky Harbor: Yeah that hook's fine. Onegreatjoke (talk) 16:55, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
- Good to go with the slightly revised hook. --Sky Harbor (talk) 05:17, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- RoySmith theleekycauldron I have reservations on promoting either hook as interesting when it comes from a non-notable reviewer. Thoughts? SL93 (talk) 16:35, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
- By "no-notable reviewer", I assume you're talking about Bessiana, not Sky Harbor? I'm not sure what to make of the source. It's certainly not WP:SIGCOV. More like a sound bite; the entire review is 3 sentences. I don't know how to evaluate rtv21. They're a TV station. TV stations run the gamut from major networks with high-quality reporting and editorial oversight, to "not so much". I have no clue where rtv21 falls on that spectrum. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:01, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
- RoySmith I mean Besiana. I have seen some articles promoted based on the opinion of a person who wrote a review for a notable company, but I usually never think that is enough. I feel like we could get something better from a GA. SL93 (talk) 17:05, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
- By "no-notable reviewer", I assume you're talking about Bessiana, not Sky Harbor? I'm not sure what to make of the source. It's certainly not WP:SIGCOV. More like a sound bite; the entire review is 3 sentences. I don't know how to evaluate rtv21. They're a TV station. TV stations run the gamut from major networks with high-quality reporting and editorial oversight, to "not so much". I have no clue where rtv21 falls on that spectrum. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:01, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
- RoySmith theleekycauldron I have reservations on promoting either hook as interesting when it comes from a non-notable reviewer. Thoughts? SL93 (talk) 16:35, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
- Good to go with the slightly revised hook. --Sky Harbor (talk) 05:17, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Sky Harbor: Yeah that hook's fine. Onegreatjoke (talk) 16:55, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
- Came to promote, but the hook is basically "Music critic says something good about song they like." I just don't think that's really very interesting. Valereee (talk) 15:43, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
- I also don't love this hook. Let me find another one... theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 19:34, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
"Clap Clap" has been described as an anthem of fun with a catchy rhythm and a good energy
seeeems like a puffery problem to me? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 19:35, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
- It does to me too. SL93 (talk) 19:38, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
- ALT1: ... that "Clap Clap" reportedly "welcomes listeners to a fun town"?
- Not great, but that's what I've got :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 19:37, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
- I think Valereee's concern remains, and I agree with it. SL93 (talk) 19:40, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
- I think so too, honestly. Thought I could offset that with the quirky, but it doesn't really work. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 21:04, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
- I think Valereee's concern remains, and I agree with it. SL93 (talk) 19:40, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
- I vote close as unsuccessful. Not every article has a hook. Valereee (talk) 16:58, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
- Marking for closure. No workable hook. SL93 (talk) 21:45, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
- I'd like to see if Onegreatjoke has any final comments before i hit the button, it's been a while since he's weighed in here. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 18:42, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- Marking for closure. No workable hook. SL93 (talk) 21:45, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
- It's fine. You can reject it now. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:46, 13 January 2023 (UTC)