Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Pagtatag!/archive2

Pagtatag!

Nominator(s): – Relayed (t • c) 18:04, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the second extended play by SB19 released back in 2023, which spawned their hit single, "Gento", which sparked a TikTok trend. I previously worked with the "Gento" article last year and was promoted to FA, and I'm here to get its parent project to get to FA as well. I already attempted to get Pagtatag! promoted last June 2024 but was unsuccessful due to prose issues. I think the article has had substantial improvements since the previous nomination, and I do think this article has the potential of becoming one of the featured content here on Wikipedia.

This is part of my ongoing efforts to improve SB19's coverage here on Wikipedia. Once promoted, it will be the first Filipino album to attain such status (and could be a little cool milestone as SB19 reaches their 6th anniversary). Feel free to leave any constructive criticism, feedback, and suggestions; thank you, reviewers, in advance who will take their time and effort here. – Relayed (t • c) 18:04, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by NØ

Given how much I enjoyed "Gento", I am excited to review this soon!--N Ø 09:13, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, MaranoFan! Nice to see you here again! I'm looking forward to your review. – Relayed (t • c) 09:34, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think you could split "released by Sony Music Philippines on June 9, 2023." into its own sentence as it doesn't work as good as a run-on in the current sentence.
Split I noticed that that's the convention you're going for in most of your FAs; I did receive a comment last time to make it a run-on, but we'll see how it goes.
The 2020 debut album's name should be written out in the prose.
Done
"Development on Pagtatag! began in 2022" - Should this maybe be "development of"?
Done
Apologies if I am missing something, but where is the fact that "Gento" received critical acclaim sourced in the article? Also, the claim that it achieved commercial success seems to not be repeated in the article body and just the chart positions are. Whereas, this type of claim would require a reference to a secondary source.
- About the “Gento” receiving critical acclaim, that’s supposed to be a summary of how critics liked the catchiness of the song (mentioned in the “Music and lyrics” section), as well as some other comments in the “Critical reception” section. Should I tone down the wording in the lead?
- Added Regarding the commercial success of the lead single, I have added a source mentioning that the single was a commercial success, hope that’ll suffice.
"Pagtatag! has been featured on 2023 year-end rankings and nominated for Album of the Year at the 2024 Awit Awards" - Why "has been" instead of "was" when 2023 is over?
Replaced
"They were able to release three singles" - "were able to release" seems unnecessary to me, maybe "released"?
Rephrased
Other than two Nase (brothers?), I am counting three additional producers on Pagsibol, so the claim that they "worked with several record producers" seems excessive and I would recommend "worked with a few other record producers" or something to that effect.
Rephrased Yep, they are indeed siblings.
"and that, in it, they would continue to explore different genres and life experiences" - "in it" could be removed
Removed
Two samples for a six-track EP seems to be pushing WP:NFCC#3 a bit. Do you have a preference between these when it comes to conveying the EP's sound, and could the other one be removed?
"I Want You" sample removed I understand. The thing with Pagtatag! is that one half of the EP sounds sonically different from the other half, so it’s hard to illustrate the EP with only one track sample (at least for me). However, I previously received a comment that "Liham" has a stronger rationale for inclusion in the article than "I Want You", so I removed the latter.
"Critics were fond of its lyricism" - maybe "praised its lyricism"?
Rephrased
"The local press considered the release a significant one" - Admittedly, it is quite a bold claim that the local press thought so, when it only seems to be supported by the Bulatlat review. Which are the other ones?
Looking back at it, yeah I agree. Toned down the sentence since I couldn't find another source to support that; would that suffice?
"Pagtatag! was nominated for the Album of the Year at the 2024 Awit Awards" - Don't think "the" is required. Also, if this ceremony has already happened I would suggest more clearly making the sentence about it in the lead past tense too.
Removed the ceremony has yet to happen, but I will update once that’s done
Awards and nominations for songs are not included in the awards table of their parent album/EP
Removed
Do you think the EP could go into Category:Hip hop EPs, Category:Soul EPs, and Category:Contemporary R&B EPs since these genres are included in the infobox? Also, I believe Contemporary R&B is usually used instead of Rhythm and blues in articles for modern releases like this.
Added That’s actually a good idea! And links for R&B have been changed to Contemporary R&B.

Those would be all the comments from me. Based on my reading, I find the article to be a strong contender for FA status so it is quite the mystery why the nomination hasn't attracted that much attention, lol. Anyways, I hope you enjoyed the review!--N Ø 07:42, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for the comments, MaranoFan. I will be looking over at them soon. And yeah, unfortunately, that's the case at the moment, but hopefully, this can get more traction sooner, not later. – Relayed (t • c) 08:36, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, MaranoFan! I have finished going over your comments, and I think I have addressed everything on the latest revision (see difference here). I have also responded to some of your points above. Let me know if everything has been sorted to your liking or you have anything else. – Relayed (t • c) 06:57, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Support~~ - Impeccable work. Hopefully my review has been able to help push the article towards a well-deserved gold star. If you are able to, I am currently seeking a third prose review on my current FAC.--N Ø 13:37, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the support, MaranoFan! Your review is indeed a great help. I'll try to have a look at your latest nom within the week; I would say "Feather" is one of my low-key favorites off her discography. – Relayed (t • c) 14:34, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have struck my !vote for the time being but would be happy to give this another look if it starts building towards a consensus to promote. Feel free to ping me here or on a future nomination.--N Ø 10:08, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

750h

lead

No problems here.

background and development

no problems here.

music and lyrics

no problems here.

release and promotion

that trended on the video sharing service TikTok add a hyphen between "video" and "sharing"

critical reception

this paragraph's pretty big, i'd split into two. I don't really mind though. 750 h+ 08:46, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

accoldates

no problems here.

Overall this article is near-perfect; excellent work on it, @Relayed:. 750 h+ 08:46, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

750h+, Relayed: I did the hyphen between "video" and "sharing".

I think the Critical Reception paragraph is indeed bulky, but if we split the paragraph to two, we need to rework the section again (transitioning the paragraphs and their ideas to not make it look like a broken bulky paragraph). So, for me, I'll keep it. RFNirmala (talk) 02:02, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support. 750 h+ 02:44, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for not responding early. Thanks for taking care of the minor edit, RFNirmala! I'll attempt to split the "Critical reception" into two paragraphs since I also notice that it's quite lengthy. Other than that, thank you for supporting, 750h+! – Relayed (t • c) 15:40, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Heartfox

"The EP incorporates musical styles including pop, EDM, hip hop, soul, and R&B—all co-written by the band's leader, Pablo—as part of the band's desire to explore genres since their departure from the dance-pop music in their debut album, Get in the Zone (2020)." → This is a lot for one sentence. I think "musical styles such as" would work better. "all co-written" → right now it reads as the "musical styles" are co-written, but this doesn't make sense.
~~" trilogy, of which Pagsibol (2021) was the first" → "trilogy that began with Pagsibol (2021)" reads nicer~~
"identity strengthening" → quotations in lead require citation per MOS:LEADCITE
~~"its songs explored" → its song explore~~
"but one considered that the EP ended weakly" → this reads awkwardly and it seems like undue weight to include the critic of one person in the lead
"which has a set list including all the songs from the EP" → do we really need the tour set list in the album's article lead? It is a given that songs from a tour named after an album would be performed on it.
"2023 year-end rankings" → rankings of what (best album, worst album?)
The first paragraph of the background and development section has no references that mention the subject of this article. I question how an entire paragraph (which is a lot more than an explanatory sentence, or footnote or something) like this meets WP:PROPORTION. I am not really a fan of this policy as I feel it has been misinterpreted by other editors in other fields, but there still needs to be some evidence that secondary sources have established a relationship between the background information and the article subject so we do not enter into original research by creating narratives, otherwise it may be more suitable to leave most of this information in the SB19 article.
"It would be the band's first release to have complete control of, from its development leading up to its release, to which they responded happily:" → reads awkwardly
suggest linking Tagalog and Cebuano
what is the purpose of the "Liham" audio sample in the second paragraph when it isn't mentioned in adjacent text?
"SB19 put the EP together as a collection of songs discerning the boy band's identity, disregarding the trends, standards, and demographic preferences in the music industry" → Is this intention coming from the group or is the statement actually supported by a secondary source?
"went for a shared creative process in which sounds and music genres the group wanted to include in the record" → I don't understand this phrase
"Critics praised its lyricism, finding it catchy and interesting", ""Critics find that the band's vocals well suited to the genre"" → I wouldn't put this level of critical reception in a music and lyrics section, it feels out of place.
"adrenaline-activat[ing]" → quotes need citation directly after given that there are 3 refs at end of sentence and unclear which supports the quote
"vocally-belted bridge" → "vocally-belted" reads weird. Links next to each other is MOS:SEAOFBLUE. 4 commas in one sentence is too much.
"whose expressed love" → who has expressed love?
~~"which was a" → and was a~~
"two Billboard record charts" → sea of blue
"were accompanied by music videos that were released to" → too much passive voice
~~"was grunge-themed" → is grunge-themed~~
"the Our Zone fifth-anniversary fan meeting" → unclear what this is
~~"kicked off" → "began" is less informal~~
~~"was met with" → received~~
"Few critics considered the release a significant one; Rafael Bautista of Nylon Manila regarded the gap since Pagsibol was worth the wait, while Bulatlat's Janness Ann Ellao finds the release proof that the "P-pop movement only seems to grow" → there are some grammar issues here which maybe make it difficult to understand what this is trying to say
"Critics also complimented the band's vocals and the EP's theme" → not really seeing this in the next sentence
~~"Many critics reacted positively with the band exploring" → Many critics reacted positively to the band exploring~~
"A separate review published by Billboard Philippines described it as a "great EP", complimenting its songwriting, particularly how the songs feature multilinguistic lyrics, including Cebuano, which they opined added "a new dimension" to the group." → this is very wordy and hard to read. There's too much ideas in one sentence. "described it as a "great EP", complimenting its songwriting" can be cut.
"However", "Nonetheless" → WP:WTW
"applauding its quality, songwriting, and cultural impact" → this needs to be rephrased outside of wikivoice
"where several of the EP's songs also helped SB19 to get nominated for 15 other awards" → this feels informal

I would have to lean oppose right now sorry. Overall it is strong and I think it can become FA in the future, but I have to agree with the reviewer in the previous FAC that for the most part "Often, unnecessary extra words are used, and it lacks clarity; meaning is sometimes difficult to discern", "The prose is unclear, grammatically inconsistent, and overly wordy." Heartfox (talk) 06:37, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Heartfox. Thanks a lot for the in-depth review of the article. In the meantime, I'll attempt to address the concerns you've raised. – Relayed (t • c) 06:58, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Relayed! I did some of the minor points mentioned by Heartfox, which I already added a strikethrough. Did this so you can have more time in focusing on other points. Thanks btw Heartfox for the detailed review RFNirmala (talk) 15:18, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the initiative, RFNirmala, but only I should be striking my comments per WP:OTHERSCOMMENTS. Heartfox (talk) 18:35, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, RFNirmala. Thanks for the initiative, I appreciate that a lot.

For the remaining comments, I recently got busy with IRL stuff that I need to attend to for the past few days, which explains why addressing the comments had been slower than usual. However, I'm eager to still pursue the nomination and hopefully I will be able to address all of comments by early next week. – Relayed (t • c) 12:23, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]