Talk:Bon Appétit (song)

Links to use

 * Billboard
 * Rap-Up
 * Entertainment Weekly
 * CBS Radio
 * Rolling Stone
 * Billboard


 * Adding timestamp. — I B  [ Poke ] 14:04, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Question about Including Criticism (LGBT/Migos)
Quick question to the primary contributors/editors of this article, but do any of you believe that the criticism against Katy Perry for collaborating with Migos, who was accused of making homophobic remarks in the past, should be included on here? I saw that a few critics felt Perry was acting hypocritical for this given that she recently was given an award based on her support the LGBT community so it may warrant inclusion on here. I apologize if this was already discussed before, but I was just curious about why this information is absent from the article. Aoba47 (talk) 15:33, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I've not looked into this, but sounds like something worth including if covered by reliable secondary sources. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:42, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes I think it's worth nothing in the reviews. — Calvin999  15:45, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the responses. Here are some potential sources that could be used in the article: 1, 2, 3. There may be more out there about this, but these three sources seem reliable and suitable for the article. I find it interesting that Perry has been coming under a lot of fire recently for some of her comments and actions (the Migos collaboration, the Britney Spears/shaved head comment, the Obama joke) when she wanted to make this album about "purposeful" pop. Don't get me wrong as I do enjoy Katy Perry's music, but it is interesting to say the least. Just pinging you as it appears that you are the primary person involved with the article, and I would be interested in your input on this matter. Aoba47 (talk) 16:02, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
 * If it is implemented, then I'm not sure whether "Critical reception" is appropriate as such criticism is more about her choice of collaborators than overall song quality. Snuggums (talk / edits) 19:10, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I would imagine that it is still part of the "critical reception" of the song as her choice of collaborators is still connected with the song itself, specifically a negative response to the song due to this decision. Aoba47 (talk) 19:13, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes I agree that it would make sense to include it as part of the critical reception section. — I B  [ Poke ] 08:15, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I added in a sentence in the appropriate section with the sources listed above. Aoba47 (talk) 19:08, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Genres
The genres in the Composition section completely contradict what's in the info box. — Calvin999 23:21, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The prose says, "Bon Appétit" is a disco-infused techno and trap song", so I changed the infobox genres to Pop and trap. Does this work? --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 16:55, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I have a problem with there being two genres in the info box in general, because to me it's either Pop or Trap, I don't see how it can be both? The MTV source calls it dance-pop, and the Billboard source Trap-pop with disco influences. Obviously disco can't be included in the info box, as it's an 'influence', but do we include Dance-pop or Trap-pop? Is there such a thing as Trap-pop, or does he mean a Pop song with trap influences (Suspect he does, as I wouldn't really call it a trap song, like 'Dark Horse' is.) — Calvin999  17:14, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm ok with multiple genres listed, as long as they are sourced. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 17:20, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't like it, because a song can only be one genre. It can't be disco, trap, pop and dance. It can only be one, with influences. But as I'm not involved with this article, I can accept there being two, but it has to be Dance-pop and Trap-pop, as that is what is explicitly written by the two critics. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  17:22, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Hatnote
Bon Appetit (album) contains a song named "Bon Appetit", and Bon Appetit (song) redirects here, so a link should be provided either to the dab or the album article. I too initially missed the O.C. song. f e  minist  14:45, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) That song doesn't warrant its own article 2) It contains "e" rather than "é". I doubt anybody is going to confuse the two. <b style="color:#454545">Snuggums</b> (<b style="color:#454545">talk</b> / <b style="color:#454545">edits</b>) 15:44, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
 * So should Bon Appetit (song) redirect here or the dab page? f  e  minist  01:05, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Definitely here since it's a much more likely search term. <b style="color:#454545">Snuggums</b> (<b style="color:#454545">talk</b> / <b style="color:#454545">edits</b>) 01:23, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Single or Promotional Single?
There has been many discussions online about the status of this song being a single or a promotional single. According to Wikipedia's definition of a single, a single is serviced to radio stations with an official service date, and also receives a psychical copy typically in the form of a CD like Perry's previous singles. This song has been out for over 3 weeks with no service date or physical copy, and the lead artist of the song has just released another "single", immediately dubbed a promotional single. If this new song receives proper "single" treatment before the song in question, I feel this song should be demoted to a promotional single. Playking616 (talk) 22:15, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It's a single. It was given digital release. It doesn't need to be released to radio for it to be a single. Radio will probably just played it anyway. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  22:18, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia's definition also lists an "iTunes countdown" single release under things that don't necessarily make a song a "single" Playking616 (talk) 22:27, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It's a single, promoted as such. Second single from Witness, end of it. — I B  [ <b style="font-family:Tempus Sans ITC;color:#1C1CF0;">Poke</b> ] 03:50, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
 * According to Billboard, Capitol Records switched the second single to Swish Swish (hence why it was released so soon afterwards) Playking616 (talk) 21:12, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
 * You're mischaracterizing the situation; it actually says that Capitol switched its focus to promoting "Swish Swish". That just means the label switched its attention to the other track. Furthermore, a single release can only be cancelled/demoted to promotional single/replaced BEFORE it first comes out, not after it's already been released. <b style="color:#009900">Snuggums</b> (<b style="color:#009900">talk</b> / <b style="color:#009900">edits</b>) 01:21, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Change the commercial information in the introduction, and add information in the commercial performance section
as Bon Appetit has reached number 9 in France and number 10 in Spain, please change the redaction in the introduction that: "Commercially, the single has reached Top ten in France and Spain, and Top twenty in Canada, Belgium and Mexico.

In addition, please add more information in the Commercial Performance section where the single debuted and peaked well in several country's music charts, such as France, Spain, Brazil, Canada and Belgium.

Regards,

Basyirun — Preceding unsigned comment added by Basyirun90 (talk • contribs) 02:03, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

French/Spanish Charts
Please stop using the French and Spanish SALES ONLY chart as official peaks. Both charts have a combined sales and streaming chart which is regarded as the official chart.

French Singles Chart Spanish Singles Chart — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:16F0:1B00:110E:5E5A:8C86:8EB2 (talk) 09:05, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Background/composition
Following the albums societal deconstruction, the song also aims to critically examine themes surrounding the objectification and oppression of women in patriarchal society. This is clearly depicted throughout the music video as Katy Perry objectifies herself. The article as present depicts the song purely as double entendres surrounding sex and food. Cameron94a (talk) 05:22, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Peak Spain
I changed the peak of Spain because Bon Appétit peaked in 69, no 10. The reference is the same since the source provided already stated that her peak was 69, the correction was made in order to make the information match the source — Preceding unsigned comment added by X2franklop (talk • contribs) 10:28, 10 April 2018 (UTC) X2franklop (talk) 12:49, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Unnecessary Information...
WHY would it be relevant, useful, or even remotely necessary to say what the song's length is in the "Composition" section, especially when it's already in the main infobox? Neateditor123 (talk) 22:54, 7 January 2019 (UTC)Neateditor123
 * Same reasons as talking about genre or lyrics in that section: it tells readers about the song's features. You also cannot solely include duration in an infobox as those are supposed to summarize content already included within article prose. See WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE for more. <b style="color:#009900">SNUGGUMS</b> (<b style="color:#009900">talk</b> / <b style="color:#009900">edits</b>) 23:04, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The reason why the song's duration should not be listed outside of the main article's infobox because it doesn't really make any sense to just state "the song is 3 minutes and 47 seconds" in the article without that fact being useful or important.--Neateditor123 (talk) 14:27, 8 January 2019 (UTC)Neateditor123
 * On the contrary, if that was true, than it wouldn't be listed in the infobox or anywhere at all. Infoboxes per WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE are suppposed to summarize important details mentioned in prose, not introduce new things never noted anywhere else. <b style="color:#009900">SNUGGUMS</b> (<b style="color:#009900">talk</b> / <b style="color:#009900">edits</b>) 20:14, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
 * All I'm trying to say here is that since the song's length is already listed in the main infobox, it's extremely repetitive to mention it again in the main article without that fact being useful or important.--Neateditor123 (talk) 20:29, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I know what you said, and that assertion is flawed. Please read the WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE section of Manual of Style/Infoboxes, especially if you haven't already, which says keep in mind the purpose of an infobox: to summarize (and not supplant) key facts that appear in the article (an article should remain complete with its summary infobox ignored). Omitting this from prose would therefore leave the article incomplete. <b style="color:#009900">SNUGGUMS</b> (<b style="color:#009900">talk</b> / <b style="color:#009900">edits</b>) 20:40, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

I agree with SNUGGUMS, the infobox is meant to summarize the contents of the article body, and I'm fine with the article mentioning the song's length. Thanks! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 20:44, 8 January 2019 (UTC)