Wikipedia:Peer review/La Isla Bonita/archive1

La Isla Bonita

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion is closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because I would eventually like to nominate it for 'Featured article' Thanks, Christian (talk) 12:38, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aoba47

Addressed comments

For this part, "La Isla Bonita" is noted for, I would clarify who noted this in the prose. Was it critics, fans, etc.? Done
I have a question about this part, The lyrics talk about an island named San Pedro, from the lead. Is this confirmed? The article positions this more as media speculation so it does not entirely match up with this part from the lead.

The lyrics do talk about San Pedro; the media speculation is regarding the geographical location of the forementioned San Pedro

Thank you for the clarification. It has been a hot minute since I have listened to this song so I honestly forgot about this in the lyrics. I would clarify in the article that the lyrics specifically mention San Pedro by name as I do not think it is there at the moment. Aoba47 (talk) 18:30, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is the "passionate" quote necessary for the lead? Could it paraphrased? It just seems random to have a quote like this in the lead. Done
For the Patrick Leonard and Michael Jackson photos, I would add the year they were taken to the caption to provide the full context for readers. Done
While I enjoy File:LaIslaBonitaunderGround.jpg, a performance image does not really fit a section about the song's critical reception. Even though the caption mentions critics, it does seem more decorative and out-of-place than informative.

It depicts a live performance of the song, thus it's relevant; many other music articles have pictures of live performances on this particular section :)

In the FAC for "Bad Romance", I had also pointed this out and the nominator agreed with my rationale and removed the image. I have gone ahead and removed the performance image from that article and I have said in my edit summary that this matter should be handled on the talk page. I do not see a clear rationale for including a performance image in a section about reviews. The image may be relevant to the article, but it is not relevant to the section, but this can be left to be discussed further by other editors/reviewers. Aoba47 (talk) 18:30, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For File:Janet Jackson 4 (cropped).jpg, I would include the year that the photo was taken to the caption and I would revise the caption to avoid having it awkwardly placed in a possessive phrase.

Done with the year; whatever do you mean 'awkwardly possessive phrase'?

The caption currently has Janet Jackson's (pictured in 2008) Control and it is less than ideal to have the pictured parenthetical in the middle of a possessive phrase. Aoba47 (talk) 18:31, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would expand the WP:FUR for File:La Isla Bonita (music video).jpg as it is rather minimal at the moment. It is encouraged to keep non-free media to a minimal so a strong case should be made for this image's inclusion. You could tie in something about critics or academics and how they viewed these characters and/or Madonna's take on Latin culture, but the argument for its inclusion right now is very weak. Done
Is there a reason for not include any of the chart information for "Mamacita" in this article? The other covers have information about their commercial performance so it makes the absence of this one more noticeable.

Only the chart performance of full-on covers are included, and "Mamacita" uses only a sample.

Idolator has been questioned in previous FACs and I do not think it is considered a high-quality source. I admit that I have used it in the past, but I have refrained from doing so after seeing comments against it so I would recommend removing that source here and replacing it with something more high-quality.

I have left just one use of this source

I would recommend removing that instance as well for the reasons that I have already stated above. I believe it would be an easy edit as I do not think that part adds a lot of value to the article or enough value to justify a potential problematic source. Aoba47 (talk) 23:57, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed it now @Aoba47: :) --Christian (talk) 17:39, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I believe foreign-language citations, such as Citation 82, should have their titles translated into English. Done
I would avoid having words in all capital letters in the citation title, such as Citation 172, even if the publication does so. Done

Here are some very quick comments to consider. I will likely do a more thorough read-through later next week. I hope these comments are helpful. Aoba47 (talk) 01:16, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the response so far. I appreciate the time and energy you have put into the article. Aoba47 (talk) 23:55, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is a citation for the English translation of the song title necessary for the lead? I am only curious because "No Me Queda Más" (which is the only song FA with a foreign language title) does not include a citation in this way, and a simple translation of a rather simple phrase does not appear particularly controversial to warrant a source (at least in my opinion).
Apologies in advice if I had missed this, but the lead and article emphasize that this was Madonna's first Latin pop song, but the article does not address the importance of this idea (i.e. how Madonna has continued to use Latin culture in her music). The Billboard citation would be a great way to source a brief sentence to further discuss why this is an important point.
For this part, included a "missable" rendition on his album, the quote should be attributed in the prose. I am always of the mindset that quotes should always be attributed in the prose to clearly identify to the reader where they are coming from, and I distinctly remember a GA reviewer calling them "ghost quotes" lol. I would look throughout the article to make sure other instances are revised.
The "Covers and usage" section is inconsistent with the descriptors for people. Some people get nationality and occupation (i.e. Dutch singer Micaela and French singer Alizée) and others get just occupation (i.e. rapper Black Rob and singer Samantha Fox) while a third option is just the name (David Hasselhoff and Britney Spears). Even Indie psychedelic folk musician Jonathan Wilson represents a fourth variant of the descriptor. I would think these descriptors should be more uniform and consistent?
This is more of a clarification question, but has there been any discussions on cultural appropriation in regards to this song and music video? I did find this article on a quick search, but it is more of a mention than anything concrete. I was just curious if this topic was discussed.

@Aoba47: Cross-commentary, as far I remember there is no commentaries about appropriation by Madonna in "La Isla Bonita". She is actually referred as a very early example/precursor of the "Latino boom" usually dated in the 1990s (Ricky Martin, J-Lo etc), and the theme is virtually remembered as a "tribute" to Latinos in contemporary or modern press. --Apoxyomenus (talk) 22:20, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the explanation. That is what I had thought, but I wanted some clarification to just be on the safe side. My personal opinions about this lean far more into this kind of thing being more of a tribute or an appreciation of the culture rather than an appropriation, but since this question did come into my mind while reading the article and given cultural appropriation has been and will likely remain a major talking point, I wanted to ask it on here to give this kind of explanation. Aoba47 (talk) 22:34, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I hope these comments are helpful. Unfortunately, I will stop my review here, but I have a lot of respect for the amount of time and work put into the article and I would love to see Madonna more represented in the FA space. Whenever I go back to editing music articles (as I will be taking a break from them), it would be a fun challenge to work on a Madonna article, but I do not want to step on anyone's toes as those articles attract a lot of edits and attention (though I'd go for a more obscure Madonna cut to be fair). Best of luck with the peer review. Aoba47 (talk) 02:37, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Aoba47: Hello! Let me know if how I've left it is more appropriate :) --Christian (talk) 14:53, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the ping. I believe moving the performance image down to the later section is a perfect idea. I actually really like that image so I am glad that it is still in the article in some capacity. I appreciate that you have opened a discussion about this on the talk page as it is best to get as many opinions as possible. I just wanted to let you know that I did see your ping, but I will leave that for other editors to discuss as I do not want to influence their opinions. Aoba47 (talk) 18:20, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]