Talk:Love Is Embarrassing

Did you know nomination

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: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 talk 16:35, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that while performing "Love Is Embarrassing", Olivia Rodrigo suffered a wardrobe malfunction, which, according to her, was also "embarrassing"?

• Source: People, Entertainment Weekly

• ALT1: ... that Olivia Rodrigo wrote "Love Is Embarrassing" the day after she lay in bed replaying every embarrassing moment in her life and cringing at herself? Source: Billboard, Rolling Stone
• ALT2: ... that Olivia Rodrigo decided to LIE on her album Guts even though her producer thought it was not a good idea? Source: Variety
• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Kanaria (musician)
• Comment: ALT2 is a play on the song's initials "LIE" (Love Is Embarrassing). But I have kept the first two hooks as safe options.

Created by MaranoFan (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 69 past nominations.

NØ 17:41, 8 August 2024 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing:
• Neutral: - n
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article was nominated for DYK within 7 days of creation (counting calendar days). Article is more than 1,500 words in prose, with proper citations. Earwig picked up an "unlikely" copyright violation of 17.4%. QPQ is done. I would go with ALT0. In addition, in the third paragraph of "Composition" and the second and third paragraphs of "Critical reception" does not specify who these "critics" that were making the statements were, so it does seem promotional sometimes. lullabying (talk) 02:41, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

• Both sentences were summary sentences in accordance with WP:RECEPTION. I have changed it to satisfy your concern with this edit though.--NØ 03:01, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

• Hi @Clovermoss: could you help me get this promoted? After making the pretty serious accusation that the article is non-neutral, Lullaby has ignored multiple pings and a talk page message from me. I reject this categorization and generally consider this an FA-quality article. The hooks are superb in my opinion, and it is pretty frustrating to be made to jump through hoops on this when they are superior to a lot of others easily being promoted. There is literally nothing left to be done here.--NØ 02:38, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

• • It has only been less than 24 hours since I first made the review and I also responded to your talk page message. No need for the hostility! Anyways, the edits seem to look good so I'll be passing it. lullabying (talk) 04:53, 21 August 2024 (UTC)