Talk:Slug (song)

Great article...
I love this song too, and the rest of the album. Well done Matkins! ΤΕΡΡΑΣΙΔΙΩΣ (Ταλκ ) 21:15, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Ready for a peer review and then an FA-nom
I think this article is great, and I really can't see anyway it can be expanded or improved. We should start a peer review for the article from the respectable WikiProjects, then get an FA-nom on the way. – Dream out loud (talk) 15:07, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I nominated it at FAC only a short time ago. The resultant discussion nearly led it to being merged into OS1 over "comprehensiveness" and size. I'm a bit hesitant to renominate it for that reason, although I think it is more than deserving. If you think it has a good chance of being promoted without another merger discussion, I'd be willing to give it another shot. Melicans (talk, contributions) 15:15, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, I had no idea it was already nominated. I can't believe there was so much "controversy" over its nomination.  I honestly feel like some editors on here will take every measure they possibly can to prevent an article from getting FA-status. – Dream out loud  (talk) 17:49, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately so. There are shorter FAs, but I guess people think that this is too short. And even if it is comprehensive, it isn't comprehensive enough for them. Melicans (talk, contributions) 18:36, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

@U2 survey
I really don't think that the @U2 survey results fit into this article. The main reason is the fact that it was ranked #4 as the best song on the album, while spot #3 was for "no preference". Despite being #4 (or #3, depending on how you look at it), it only received that ranking by about 4% of the people taking that poll. It seems to mess up the flow of the article and confuse the readers on the reception of the song. It makes it seem as if the song was well received by critics, but not by fans. Even though it was ranked #4 (or #3) which is high, the 4% number is low, causing more confusion. I think removing those entire two sentences would be best and condensing the section into one paragraph. – Dream out loud (talk) 22:42, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

The second FAC ends...
...and the result is the same. Not promoted. Shocker. I think I've just about given up on it now. It's as comprehensive and thoroughly detailed as it can possibly be, but that still isn't enough it seems. Nope, you need to add and cite facts that are don't even exist. How disappointing; a GA forever. I hope that, someday, somebody will be able to prove me wrong on that - I'll be forever thankful to them, for doing what I could not despite all of my efforts. End rant. Melicans (talk, contributions) 07:28, 15 December 2010 (UTC)