Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Saving Light/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 archived by Sarastro1 via FACBot (talk) 21:32, 5 September 2018 [1].

Saving Light

Nominator(s): Micro (Talk) 02:06, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the 2017 trance song "Saving Light" by English electronic music producers Gareth Emery and Standerwick. I believe that the article meets the Featured Article criteria when compared to featured articles of around the same length such as "All You Need Is Love". The article was previously nominated for featured article status, but it failed only because it only had one vote, which was to support the promotion. I had addressed and fixed all comments and concerns the one voter had addressed, which, they eventually chose to support the promotion. The following statement written below was originally from the first featured article nomination, though I have edited it to keep it up to date.

Well written. During the articles good article review and first featured article review, it was almost completely rewritten to make sure that the article is the best it could possibly be, making sure that everything has been supported by reliable and third-party reference and that the article was completely unbiased. The article had undergone a copy edit that I had requested from the Guild of Copy Editors where it is now very well written in my own opinion.
Factually accurate, neutral and verifiable. The article has around 30 references, all of which being proven to be reliable in the articles good article review. The article did contain some unreliable sources, though all of which had been removed during the good article review. The number of references may be considered quite low for a featured article or even a good article, though this is because it isn't a very well known song, being released by a relatively small indie record label.
Stable. The article had received only a few edits since it's first article nomination, as there is really nothing more to add or fix. My last edit (as of writing this) was on the 22nd of July, though there have only been 4 minor edits since my last contribution to the article, the last of which was on the 29th of July.
Appropriate length. The article is of adequate length, being around 26,300 bytes in size and having 1,233 words (according to XTools). The article is not too long, containing only how much the article should have without it dragging on.

The article had previously undergone a peer review, with it being reviewed as a B-class article before it had passed it's first good article review shortly after. The article was then nominated for a featured article promotion, though it failed because of the lack of voters and because of so, I was allowed by a FAC Coordinator to re-nominate it only a few days after the first nomination was archived. The article contains only one fair use image, being the official cover art for the song. Micro (Talk) 02:06, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support for FA nomination, completed article fits all mentioned criteria for FA status while its MOS looks fine overall. aNode (discuss) 14:58, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support nomination, no major problems that oppose the criteria for a featured article Lazz _R 14:31, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support as all my comments were already resolved in the previous FAC attempt (here). Aoba47 (talk) 17:53, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

The lead image, File:Saving Light Gareth Emery Standerwick Cover.jpeg, is a single cover with appropriate ALT text. However the "Media data and Non-free use rationale" box for it is incomplete; please fill in the n.a. areas. I would look to how other song FAs do it. Aoba47 (talk) 17:56, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed, replaced with a Non-free use rationale template for album covers. Micro (Talk) 20:12, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me; it passes the image review. Good luck with the review. Aoba47 (talk) 20:19, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Based just on the critical reception section, which is the only section I have read. It's just a list of quotes, attributed to critics. It should be a coherent narrative of the critical commentary, with quotes used to illustrate. See WP:RECEPTION for some relevant advice. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:58, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Christie: The critical reception section is based off of Habits (Stay High) and S&M (song), both of which have similar sections to Saving Light. The section could be edited into two review parts, one for the emotional parts of the song and the other for composition, though it might need further improvements:

“

Saving Light" was well received by most critics. The Nocturnal Times Caroline O'Keefe wrote that "Gareth and Standerwick delivered a major hit", stating "the moving vocals of Haliene glide over Emery & Standerwick’s carefully tried and tested ensemble." We Rave Yous Fiorito Maniego praised the song, saying "the quality 'Saving Light' possesses certainly does not disappoint as it features a brilliant combination of Emery and Standerwick's incredible trance elements and Haliene's striking vocals." The song won Best Original Track in the Trance category on the Best of 2017 by the /r/EDM subreddit with 198 participants.

Writing for Billboard, Sergei Zarovnyi described the song as "full of emotion at every turn from Haliene's incredible vocals to the gripping production and lyrics that speak to the soul", while Abisola Oseni of EDM Identity described the song as "both melodic and uplifting", adding "this coupled with deep lyrics belted out by Haliene makes it an amazingly emotional track." Steph Evans of EARMILK wrote that Gareth Emery and Standerwick have "followed a seemingly formulaic path in creating this track." She felt the song's melody made it "plain beautiful, emotional [with] a production that speaks to each level of talent involved.

”

Micro (Talk) 02:36, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This version of the critical reception has been scrapped. The main page's section has been replaced with a better one, which might be satisfactory to the opposer's standards. Micro (Talk) 06:04, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator comment: Just a passing note that, of the three supports, only Aoba47 seems to have provided a full review. Even if the oppose is struck, we need much more commentary, based on the FA criteria before we even consider promotion. Sarastro (talk) 20:23, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Sarastro1: Although not on this page, both ANode and Lazz_R have submitted a ‘full review’ on Saving Light’s talk page, under “FA recommendations”, only posting a summary for support here. Micro (Talk) 22:05, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Closing comment: Looking at the review on the talk page (which I don't think really addresses WP:WIAFA) and Mike's concerns, I think this FAC is best archived. It's been open for over a month, and there is no consensus to promote, and with the oppose, little likelihood of reaching that consensus in the timeframe of a FAC. I will be archiving shortly. It can be renominated after the usual 2 week waiting period, but I would recommend working on this away from FAC and maybe getting some eyes on it at WP:PR first. I would also suggest looking at what Mike said in his oppose, and maybe see if he is willing to give a little help away from FAC. Sarastro (talk) 21:31, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been archived, 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. Sarastro (talk) 21:32, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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