Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Government Hooker/archive2

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 not promoted by GrahamColm 15:44, 15 September 2012 [1].

Government Hooker

Nominator(s): ðάπι (talk) 18:37, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Born This Way, the second studio album of American recording artist Lady Gaga, was released to the public on May 23, 2011. The album produced varying responses from music commentators, and many felt that the album was subpar from Gaga's previous efforts. However, a number of tracks on the album were praised, including "Government Hooker", a song that many of her fans profess to being Gaga at her best. I am nominating this for featured article because I think it fulfills the FA criteria. I've put a lot of work into this article, and it recently got a copyedit from Lfstevens. A previous nomination was closed not too long ago, but GrahamColm has given me permission to re-nominate the article within the two week limit due to limited feedback. —DAP388 (talk) 18:37, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~Leaning oppose~~ While this seems comprehensive given that the song was never officially released as a single (to the extent that matters these days!), the article's prose needs a fair bit of work. Much of it contains jargon or reads like something from a magazine. My comments are:

Both the paragraphs of the lead start with "Government Hooker"
- Fixed. —DAP388 (talk) 20:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Government Hooker" was previously an unused track that Shadow and DJ Snake created, and was revealed as he was introducing numerous tracks to Vince Herbert for Born This Way." - this sentence is really difficult to follow.
- Fixed. I removed the latter part of the sentence, as I don't think it is relevant. —DAP388 (talk) 20:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Recording sessions for the song took place at the Studio at the Palms in Las Vegas, Nevada." - when?
- I'd assume in August 2010, since that is when she visited the city during her Monster Ball Tour. The album notes states that it was recorded in 2010, but nothing more. —DAP388 (talk) 20:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Adding that would be helpful. Nick-D (talk) 08:17, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done. —DAP388 (talk) 18:28, 20 August 2012‎ (UTC)[reply]
"Gaga performed the song at various live appearances including the Born This Way Ball." - what the relevance of this? It's routine for artists to play all the songs off their most recent album during tours.
- Fixed. —DAP388 (talk) 20:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What's the purpose of the quote from DJ White Shadow? It essentially says nothing other than that he likes the song.
- Fixed. —DAP388 (talk) 20:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"This came out which when Shadow met up with Vince Herbert, Gaga's label boss, to introduce hip-hop beats for prospects." - poor grammar, and the whole 'it was revealed'/'it came out'-type phrasing is not necessary - just say what the events were.
- Fixed. I think the quote just reiterates what was being said. —DAP388 (talk) 20:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"We were in this studio in Vegas," he remarked, - who the 'he' here is unclear given that the previous sentence mentions several men
- Fixed. —DAP388 (talk) 20:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - I don't think that "We were in this studio in Vegas," Shadow remarked" is much of an improvement to be honest; this still reads like a magazine article (ditto "'We were sitting there thinking how to make a computerized voice," reminisced DJ Shadow") Nick-D (talk) 08:17, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Fixed. —DAP388 (talk) 18:28, 20 August 2012‎ (UTC)[reply]
""Government Hooker" was previewed " - are songs really 'previewed'? Surely 'played in public for the first time' or similar is more factual.
- Fixed. —DAP388 (talk) 20:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How is a song 'imbued' with elements of different genres?
- Fixed. —DAP388 (talk) 20:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Amy Scarietto of PopCrush proclaimed that the opening was akin to Gwen Stefani incorporating the yodeling of The Sound of Music's "The Lonely Goatherd" (1959) into "Wind It Up"" - what's the relevance of this?
- Removed. —DAP388 (talk) 20:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
'professed' seems an odd choice of words to use when describing a review
- Fixed. —DAP388 (talk) 20:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Rolling Stone declared "Government Hooker" as the twenty-eighth best song out of Gaga's discography" - did they really 'declare' this? It seems rather unimpressive given that she hasn't released a huge number of songs to date.
- Removed. —DAP388 (talk) 20:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Another journalist at that publication, Jody Rosen, affirmed " - 'affirmed' is rather odd in this context
- Fixed. —DAP388 (talk) 20:14, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
All the comments from reviewers are positive, even those referenced to Amy Sciarretto (you've left out her concluding sentence of "'Government Hooker’ should get a–es moving on the dancefloor, but it is not the best song on ‘Born This Way.’")
- Fixed. —DAP388 (talk) 20:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"In creating the vignette, Gaga wanted to give her fans an inside look of her daily life. "I really wanted it to be real, and I knew that MTV wanted it to be a true documentation of my life, and as someone that lives halfway between reality and fantasy, so do all my friends. So I felt [it would be] an injustice to not sort of honor them in this short film that we did."" - what does this have to do with the song? Nick-D (talk) 09:58, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Removed. Apologies for the late response.—DAP388 (talk) 20:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Sorry for my late responses! Nick-D (talk) 08:17, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support My comments have now been addressed; nice work with this article. Nick-D (talk) 10:25, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! :) —DAP388 (talk) 01:43, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments. Hmmm, I saw the title and wondered whether this was some form of state-run prostitution.

"The song's lyrical content subsumes feministic themes"—Is "subsumes" the right word? What about the plain vanilla "includes"?
- Done. —DAP388 (talk) 20:25, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
""Government Hooker" begins as Gaga sings in a melodramatic, operatic fashion." I'm not a fan of "as" in that context. I first comprehended ""Government Hooker" begins as Gaga ...", meaning begins in the form of Gaga. Then I had to reverse into the intended meaning.
- Done. I changed it to "when". —DAP388 (talk) 20:25, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"The song then catapults into the chorus"—OK, as long as it's a very energetic transition into the chorus.
- Meh. "Progresses" is a better word in this case. —DAP388 (talk) 20:25, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"As the breakdown commences, the lyrics "Put your hands on me / John F. Kennedy / I'll make you squeal baby" suggests of the rumored affair between Marilyn Monroe and John F. Kennedy." Can we go plain? "At the start of the breakdown, the lyrics ... allude to the rumoured affair ...". And you can't suggest of.
- Done. —DAP388 (talk) 20:25, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Projection verbs. No no: the variation to avoid repetition is forced. I've bolded each:

"Roberts asserted that the song was a "funky" exception to the "obnoxious" nature of Born This Way.[5] Caryn Ganz of Spin ~~avouched~~ said that Lady Gaga's eccentric and outlandish persona—the so-called "nutty come-ons"—were apparent in the "grimy doom disco" of "Government Hooker".[12] Sal Cinquemani of Slant Magazine described it as "filthy-fabulous",[13] while Jocelyn Vena of MTV called the song a "massive club track".[3] Rolling Stone journalist Jody Rosen felt that the production of the "requisite kinky song" was captivating, and pinpointed including its "shape-shifting assemblage of buzzes, beeps and clattering beats".[4] Dan Martin of NME ~~opined~~ wrote that "Government Hooker" ~~was~~ is inimical to the campy nature of the album, and felt that as the track starts, Born This Way effectively transcends into "claustrophobic" techno beats."

"asserted" is pretty strong, so I hope the context deserves this marked verb. Otherwise use the default verb for projection, which is "said". "Said" can be repeated a little without sticking out ... but not too much. "avoiched" ... ouch ... is that from a thesaurus? "called" and "described" sound natural, as does "felt". "Pinpointed"???? I hate "opined". The rest of the projections are ok.

I think "asserted" is appropriate with the context. As for "pinpointed", I'm not sure what's wrong with it. This is what the journalist noticed when they heard the song. Maybe I should use "noticed" or "observed" instead? And I'm a little confused by the "natural" comment. What does that mean? —DAP388 (talk) 020:25, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"in two countries."—better a colon.
- Done —DAP388 (talk) 20:25, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Gaga performed "Government Hooker" at the Clinton Foundation's Decade of Difference celebration~~, an event that occurred~~ at the Hollywood Bowl in Los Angeles, California." Clunky. Please take a look at these exercises, and be more conscious of the need to make your prose plain. In English, uniquely, plain is elegant. Tony (talk) 06:59, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. —DAP388 (talk) 20:25, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Responses: Sorry, "sound natural" meant "they're fine". "Pintpointed" works only if the target is tiny; but it's not. I've tried to suggest improvements above. Tony (talk) 12:59, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Okie dokie. Done. —DAP388 (talk) 20:00, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~Comments~~Oppose - Hi DAP. Some suggestions and comments after having taken a look at the article. Note that I am a WP Lady Gaga member. Most are easily amendable tweaks, but two unsourced assertions and overusage of quotations are leaving me concerned.

"It was composed and produced by Gaga in collaboration with Fernando Garibay, Paul Blair, and DJ White Shadow." – "in collaboration with" seems a bit wordy here. Why not just "... by Gaga, Fernando Garibay, Paul Blair, and DJ White Shadow"?
- I believe saying "in collaboration" would avoid any confusion on the writing and production credits. —DAP388 (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - How so? The credits section does suggest that all three did both production and writing. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 20:48, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - It makes sense now, given I originally got confused between Paul Blair and White Shadow (they are the same person). Fixed. —DAP388 (talk) 02:06, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"... Shadow created ~~in collaboration~~ with DJ Snake."
- Done. —DAP388 (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Recording sessions ~~for the song~~ took place in 2010 at the Studio at the Palms in Las Vegas, Nevada." – Redundant "for the song". It's obvious what the sessions were for. Note that this should be applied in the lead as well as Background.
- Done. —DAP388 (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"experienced commercial success" → "charted"? More concise and accurate.
- Done. —DAP388 (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Avoid state-of-mind expressions (e.g. decided to). They are redundant.
- Done. —DAP388 (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Herbert was particularly enamored by the prototype of "Government Hooker", more so than all of the beats that he heard during the session." – A bit confused here. What were these beats? He was working on other songs?
- Shadow played other beats during the session beside the "Government Hooker" prototype. —DAP388 (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - I can't quite find this fact ("more so than all of the beats that he heard during the session") in the MTV link cited. Another thing, I think "enamoured" is a bit too strong here. Simply "Herbert liked the new prototype..." sounds accurate. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 20:48, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done with the enamored bit. As for the beats, I got this from here: "We were in this studio in Vegas, and I was playing some hip-hop stuff [for Gaga's label boss Vince Herbert], and I ran across this [old beat I had made], and we were talking about faster songs, so I sped it up and I played it for Vince." —DAP388 (talk) 02:06, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Gaga constructed the lyrics" – Simply "wrote" sounds plainer.
- Done. —DAP388 (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"While writing, security guard Peter Van Der Veen was recruited to provide vocals; this process was chosen in lieu of devising computerized vocals." - sounds a bit rough and unplain. Also, the "while writing" implies that Peter was the one who was writing the song. I think we can make this a bit smoother. How about "During writing, security guard Peter Van Der Veen was recruited to sing in lieu of computerized vocals." If this changes the meaning of what you intend to say, then let's try something else.
- This is fine. —DAP388 (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Alongside with 'Scheiße' and a remix of 'Born This Way'" – "alongside with"?
- Removed. —DAP388 (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not so fussy about a song containing elements. Sounds a bit awkward, but that's just my opinion. You could just say "dance-pop song with elements..." and "the song has 'deliciously' amalgamated elements..."
- I changed one of them to avoid any repetition. —DAP388 (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - I don't think changing the other one would be repetitive, but I'm OK with it. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 20:48, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, the delicious amalgamation tidbit sounds more like it would belong in Reception as it is a praiseful opinion on the song.
- Meh. I think it'd be better in the composition section because of the references to the songs. —DAP388 (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - How about remove "deliciously" then? It doesn't fit into the section. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 20:48, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Removed. —DAP388 (talk)
"The song~~'s lyrical content~~ includes feministic themes". It'd be a bit hard to understand how the music would have feministic themes. ;)
- Silly me. LOL, done. —DAP388 (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
", which consist of the lyrics," – just replace with a colon. Redundant phrase.
- Done. —DAP388 (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"A call and response ensues as a male vocalist accompanies Gaga's lyrics" – Original research.
- Removed. —DAP388 (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"As the breakdown commences" – Original research.
- Removed. —DAP388 (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Reception section is a bit too heavy on quotation usage and borderline quote farm. Try and see if any quotations can be trimmed and/or converted into original prose.
- I used some synonyms to replace those single word quotes, and I did paraphrase one of the bigger snippets. Not much else I can do without removed some of the oomph, in my opinion.
  - Much better. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 20:48, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"The song was featured in a promotional video for the 2011 MTV Video Music Awards~~,[20] which aired~~ on August 18, 2011, coinciding with an episode of Jersey Shore." – Cut "which aired", which makes readers think it was the awards show that aired in that date, not the promo. Also, why is the fact that it aired during Jersey Shore relevant?
- I was just taking advantage of the specificity. —DAP388 (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Unless there is a direct connection between the promo and the Jersey Shore episode, it comes off as fancrufty. You might be able to say "...on the night of August 18, 2011", but that's likely as specific as you can get. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 20:48, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Removed. —DAP388 (talk) 02:06, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"The singer was a candidate for several awards." – Has nothing to do with the song.
- Removed. —DAP388 (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Tracklist? The song was never independently released.
- Removed. —DAP388 (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The chart peak table needs to be formatted per WP:ACCESS with plain row headers.
- Huh? Is it not already formatted like that? —DAP388 (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - My eyes must be playing games... —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 20:48, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
PopCrush does not look like a reliable source.
- I was a little reluctant to use PopCrush as a source, but it is the only website that verifies the promotional video info and the song's hook. As for the "reception" section, it's a bit thin to begin with, so I added it because only a handful of other publications reviewed the song. —DAP388 (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - I didn't find any editorial information/qualifications on Amy Sciaretto, so that does not look promising. It's hard to say it would even pass muster for GAN, much less FAC. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 20:48, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Hmm.... perhaps I could ask whether it is acceptable here. —DAP388 (talk) 02:06, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      - Good idea. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 10:40, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Got a page number for ref 1?
- Yes sir. Added. —DAP388 (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will be happy to withdraw my oppose when my concerns have been responded to. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 21:56, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some comments...

Never released as a single... --> This is a bit awkward. Perhaps "Despite not being released as a single"?
Genres in composition should be linked where possible.
According to the music sheet published by Sony/ATV Music Publishing on Musicnotes.com --> Not necessary
Also as pointed out above, PopCrush isn't a reliable source for FA. Till 07:20, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- All good points, Till, but as per consensus at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_56#Musicnotes.com and WP:USM, in-text attribution is needed to Musicnotes.com and the copyright owner of the sheet music. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 00:09, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.