Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Clown (Mariah Carey song)/archive1

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) 29 September 2023 [1].

Clown (Mariah Carey song)

Nominator(s): Heartfox (talk) 19:00, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mariah Carey vs. Eminem round 1... this is my favourite song article I have written so far, let me know what you think ;) Thanks to Ippantekina who kindly conducted the GA review. Heartfox (talk) 19:00, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Aoba47

This article references Carey as both a singer and a songwriter, while other articles, such as "Never Forget You" and "Sweetheart", only use singer to describe. I believe this should be consistent along all of the song articles.
Adjusted
I am uncertain about the wording in the both the lead and the article about Andre Harris and Vidal Davis and Dre & Vidal. It is not immediately clear in the prose that Dre & Vidal is a title used by Harris and Davis when they produce together so it could be misread as these three being separate entities. I would find a way to clarify that.
Added a note
For this part, (Before the release of her film Glitter and its accompanying soundtrack in 2001), I would add a link to the Glitter soundtrack since an article for it exists.
Added
For the audio sample, I do not think it is necessary so specify what part of the song is being played in the title. From my experience, it is more common to include just the song title (or the artist's name if more is added), and I do not see this additional information as particularly beneficial.
Done
For this part, (According to Marcia Alesan Dawkins), I would clarify who Dawkins is in the prose to give readers a better understanding on why she is cited here. I have the same comment for Vincent Stephens.
Added
Is it worth noting in this article that "Obsessed" was also said to be directed at Eminem?
I would prefer to leave that to the background section of "Obsessed"
I was leaning in that direction as well, especially if critics or sources do not explicitly make connections between these two songs. I could see this quickly spiraling into tangents and it is best to keep the focus on this specific song, but I wanted to ask anyway as it did come to my mind while reading the article. I agree with your choice and I appreciate your response.
I would be consistent with how possessives are done in the article. I see both Nas's and Pet Shop Boys' when the s's or s' should be more consistent throughout the article.
~~Done~~ Removed for Pet Shop Boys as "Boys" is a plural noun per MOS:PLURALNOUN
The Jaan Uhelszki review is dead so it should be marked as such. I would also revise the wording for her (Amazon.com critic Jaan Uhelszki). From my experience, Amazon.com reviews are not considered reliable or high-quality enough for inclusion in a FA, but it would be appropriate because of the author's background so I would find a way to better incorporate that into the prose as this did catch my attention. The wording makes it out to be just a Amazon.com critic and nothing else.
It is a live link for me. Reworded.
Thank you for rewording it. I had a massive brain fart while writing this review. Instead of saying that the link was dead, I meant to say that I get an error screen when I try to reach the page. I get the following message: "We're sorry, an error has occurred. Please reload this page and try again." The page no longer has the Uhelszki review at least on my end. I see the product and I see consumer reviews, just not the review being cited. Apologies again for wording my initial comment poorly and incorrectly, and I hope that this clears it up, but let me know if further clarification is necessary. Aoba47 (talk) 19:23, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can you see the review in the archived link?
I can see the review in the archived link. Aoba47 (talk) 16:18, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I hope these comments are helpful. Once everything has been addressed, I will read through the article a few more times just to make sure I have not overlooked anything. Best of luck with this FAC and great work as always. Aoba47 (talk) 20:15, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments, Aoba47. Heartfox (talk) 13:54, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the responses. I have clarified my point about the Amazon source above. Aoba47 (talk) 19:23, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for adding an additional comment, but I had noticed this and wanted to post it before I forgot about it. I have a quick question about Note B. I was curious if the bit on Carey's 2001 breakdown would need more context for unfamiliar readers. When I was thinking about how to best approach this, I noticed that the primary Wikipedia article on Carey uses a link (breakdown) and I think having that here would be beneficial to provide some context without adding undue weight or making it unnecessarily wordy. Aoba47 (talk) 02:02, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Added the section link
Thank you for the responses to everything. Unfortunately, I found out today that I have COVID so I cannot complete this review at this time. If the FAC is still up when I am feeling better, I will look back, but I am not mentally or physically in a place right now to finish this review. Apologies for that. Aoba47 (talk) 16:18, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies for the delay in my follow-up message. Everything looks good to me. I support this FAC for promotion. Best of luck with this FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 14:38, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hope you are feeling better! Heartfox (talk) 21:13, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the message. I am getting there. Hopefully I feel 100% in the near future. Aoba47 (talk) 16:55, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport from Chris

""Clown" received analysis from scholars who thought Carey is contending that Eminem's masculine persona is fake" => ""Clown" received analysis from scholars who thought Carey was contending that Eminem's masculine persona was fake"
Done
"the Pet Shop Boys's "The Night I Fell in Love"" => "the Pet Shop Boys' "The Night I Fell in Love"" (you don't put apostrophe + s after a plural noun ending in s - see eg this headline)
Done
"Before the release of her film Glitter and its accompanying soundtrack in 2001, Mariah Carey suffered" => "Before the release of her film Glitter and its accompanying soundtrack in 2001, American singer Mariah Carey suffered" (you introduced her as such in the lead but it probably needs to be in the body too)
Agreed
"a purported romantic relationship with Eminem gone awry" => "a purported romantic relationship gone awry with rapper Eminem"
Done
"The Philadelphia Inquirer critic Tom Moon regarded Carey's "rap-inspired heat" superior" => "The Philadelphia Inquirer critic Tom Moon regarded Carey's "rap-inspired heat" as superior"
Done
"Robinson viewed "Clown" as inferior to his efforts" => "Robinson viewed "Clown" as inferior to Timberlake's efforts" (for total clarity, as technically "his" could refer to Robinson himself)
Adjusted
"Stephens likened it to the Pet Shop Boys's " - as above
Done
"Carey has not acknowledged "Clown" is about Eminem" => "Carey has not acknowledged that "Clown" is about Eminem"
Added
Note d uses UK spellings rather than US, is this because the original source does so.....?
It is a quote from a journal published by Cambridge University Press (uses UK spelling)
That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:36, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@ChrisTheDude: thanks so much for the helpful comments. Heartfox (talk) 02:35, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:29, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GWL

Hey there, this is a pretty short article so there's also only a few minor comments here, hope they're useful! Gerald WL 08:41, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Gerald WL 04:50, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

* "of her film Glitter"-- "her film" is a possessory credit for directors/producers, but Carrey only starred in it, she doesn't hold any "a film by" attribution. Suggest "of Glitter, a film she starred in, and its accompanying..."

Incorporated the suggestion
"A media circus ensued"-- isn't this an idiom? AFAIK, Wikipedia generally discourages idioms.
Changed to "ensuing media coverage"

"Tatum. She produced it"-- might as well just combine these two, having them separate feels awkward with them being equally short sentences.
Combined
"in Capri, Italy, Right Track Studios in New York City, and The Studio in Philadelphia." Should they be separated by semicolon, acknowledging the comma in "Capri, Italy?"
Done per MOS:COLON
"Lorenz and"-- "Lorez, and" to give distinctions, this sentence has three and-s
Done
Shouldn't answer song be linked in the first mention of it at BG section--"She responded further with the song "Clown""?
Added
""Clown" received scholarly analysis" sounds kinda awkward, suggest adding "several" between received and scholarly.
Added
Why is ref 17 dup?
There used to be an intermittent sentence with a different ref; removed
Perhaps linking hypermasculinity and genderphobia?
Linked

Why is footnote g in a footnote? I thought it can be a wonderful extension to the prose. Ditto fn h.
Converted to prose
Italicize roman a clef
Italicized
Why is there a comma after roman a clef but not 'Youre So Vain', wherein the sentence transitions to a whole other review?
Added a comma

Perhaps linking jersey?
Would cause a sea of blue
"The live performances received reviews"-- should probably add that it's "generally negative reviews"
Added

Thanks for the very helpful comments! Heartfox (talk) 18:07, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, you resolved the comments pretty well! This is an easy support -- well done! Also if you have time and are interested, I have a film PR open. Gerald WL 04:50, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Media review

File:Clown Mariah Carey.ogg – Fair use rationale is good and sample length is fine per WP:SAMPLE (10% of the song length is 19.7 seconds and the sample is 20 seconds; even if rounding up isn't okay under SAMPLE, the length requirement is just a rule of thumb, not a strict requirement).

Can any images be added to the article? Photos of Mariah Carey or the co-writers? voorts (talk/contributions) 04:33, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing the media review! I did think about adding a photo of Carey or Eminem (none seem to exist for the co-writers), but they would mostly be decorative in my opniion. The reader is not really going to learn anything from a basic side-by-side of them. If there was a usable picture of them together in 2001 "in a relationship" then that would definitely add context and illustration to the adjacent prose, but that's unfortunately not the case. Heartfox (talk) 05:01, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also no photos from tour performances of the song seem to be available, although there are some for others. Heartfox (talk) 05:02, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. This passes. voorts (talk/contributions) 05:15, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ippantekina

Note that I'm reviewing this revision

"She likens Eminem to a liar, a puppet, a transitory figure, and a clown whose private personality contradicts his public image." pretty lengthy for the lede. Did she really compare Eminem to all of these?
All of the references are given in the composition and lyrics section. Removed "transitory figure" for flow.
"They compared it to [a plethora of songs]" I think this could be connected with the bit about scholarly analysis of the lyrics
I didn't see this connection in any of the sources except the Pet Shop Boys song
Optional but do we have a YouTube URL for an official audio?
Added
"Before the release of Glitter, a film she starred in, and its accompanying soundtrack in 2001, American singer Mariah Carey suffered an emotional and physical breakdown" quite a few commas! I'd suggest "American singer Mariah Carey suffered an emotional and physical breakdown before she starred in the 2001 film Glitter and released its accompanying soundtrack"
Honestly I just removed everything to do with Glitter as that level of specificity is better suited to the Charmbracelet album article
A photo of Eminem with a caption like "Eminem, the song's subject" would help the "Background" section imo.
As the article already passed a media review I would prefer not to annoy the other reviewer
"Eminem opined about Carey"; eh, quite literary. I'd go for something simple like "Eminem said about Carey"
Changed to "Eminem spoke of Carey"
"It features background vocals by Carey and Trey Lorenz,[10] and lasts for three minutes and seventeen seconds" no need for a comma here
Removed
"the composition,[12] which Carey sings over" shouldn't it be "over which"?
Done
"The first of her songs alluding to a feud,[14] "Clown" aligns with a pattern of Carey's musical output becoming more personal as her career progressed" I would split into two sentences: " 'Clown" is the first song in which Carey alludes to a feud. It is a blueprint for Carey's musical output..."
Reworded to remove the comma
"as did Jim Farber of the New York Daily News, who remarked" I think it should be "New York Daily News' Jim Farber, who remarked"
Done

Overall a solid article. Happy to support once my comments are addressed. Ippantekina (talk) 07:20, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ippantekina, replied to all above. Heartfox (talk) 15:22, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support on prose. Great work as always. I personally would like to see the inclusion of Eminem's photo but that shouldn't influence my support. Ippantekina (talk) 07:49, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

The citations are reliable and high-quality, particularly for a music article. There are a good mixture of web sources, newspaper and print sources, and academic sources. A consistent citation style is used and there are not any errors in the citation structures. I have just have a few quick clarification questions below:
For the Charmbracelet citation, shouldn't Monarc Entertainment be included alongside Island Records?
Added
Do Dateline NBC episodes have titles? The IMDb entries for the show has episode titles (here), but that is not a particularly reliable source, and TV listings like the one here do not include an episode title. Do you have a clearer answer for this one?
Factiva only includes the transcript from the interview portion of the episode and doesn't give an episode title
Thank you for the clarification. That makes sense to me. I would not imagine that a show like Dateline NBC would use episode titles anyway. Aoba47 (talk) 14:26, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Any reason why this citation is upside-down?
An error on Newspapers.com's part
That's what I had thought, but I wanted to make sure. Thank you for the response. Aoba47 (talk) 14:26, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have done a brief spot-check and most of the information from the sources that I have checked match the citations and what is cited in the article. I do have a comments about this below:
The Joshua Klein citation points to an unrelated article by Chris Richards (with a different title than the one in the citation). The archived version has the correct article.
Thanks for catching that
The Tom Moon citation has the title, They're Back, and Up-Front, but based on the Newspapers.com clipping, the title appears to be: Houston, Carey back to making music. That being said, the clipping is a continuation of a review from another page so feel free to let me know if the title used in the citations is from the previous page. I've been having issues with accessing Newspapers.com (as I seemingly have to log on to the Wikipedia Library to access it rather than going to the site directly like in the past). Otherwise, I'd check it myself.
The title is from H1 but the clipping is H13 because only H13 is cited
Thank you for the explanation. Makes sense to me. Aoba47 (talk) 14:26, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I hope this source review is helpful. Once everything has been addressed, I will be more than happy to pass this. Hopefully, this will help to bring this FAC across the finish line and get promoted in the near future. Aoba47 (talk) 18:24, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for doing this! Heartfox (talk) 22:50, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am glad that I could help. Thank you for the responses. This passes my source review. Aoba47 (talk) 14:26, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:22, 29 September 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.