User:MaranoFan/GA2FA

GA2FA is a project started by Wikipedian MaranoFan to assist music editors in turning their good articles into featured articles. The project was undertaken by MaranoFan after he noticed the stark difference in the amount of music articles that get promoted to good status and those to featured. It aims to help more music articles get to FA space, and to make the latter a less scary place for editors of modern music articles.

Background
MaranoFan submitted "Lips Are Movin" as his first featured article candidate in October 2016, which was met with failure. He kept contributing to Wikipedia and improving content, and had accumulated 14 good articles by the time he mustered the courage to submit a second article to FAC, "All About That Bass" in April 2019. This attempt failed as well. Baffled by the extreme difference in standards between the two distinctions, MaranoFan questioned if there was something flawed with the process. Other editors in the pop music space faced the wrath of the extreme, grilling FAC process as well. MaranoFan would eventually attain a featured article through Meghan Trainor's July 2020 nomination. This was still a meagre sum compared to the whopping 36 good articles MaranoFan had achieved at the time.

Differences
The leap from GA to FA is no small one. The FAC process is not for the weak-willed. It will take months and months (probably years) of work at the very least. The prose of an FA is meant to make use of very flowery words that you would not see in a GA, which is perhaps where the leap is the biggest. Size does matter! Yes, from my observation, bigger articles have a much easier time floating by at an FAC. People have an easier time believing those are comprehensive and well-researched. Articles about older songs and albums that are not very popular right now will have an easier time meeting the stability criteria. Your article will also be subjected to a very brutal source review that will take out most of the information in it. You shall not freak out when you are asked to remove bucket loads of content due to "unreliable" sourcing, but more on that later.

If the subject of your musical article has won or been nominated for a Grammy Award, that will help you gain confidence of the FAC community that your article is legit. Extreme controversy, acclaim, commercial success, or all of them together are definitely helpful ingredients. I have rarely seen an FAC about a critically panned song pass. Highly regarded classics by rock bands seem to have an easy time. FACs about modern day pop songs will struggle, and the content has to be that much better to get the reviewers' attention.

Process
The process is not perfect, at all. Editors you have had prior conflicts with have full freedom to walk in and sabotage your nomination. Yes, this process is not for someone who has a lot of enemies. Extreme niceness, to the point where it feels humorous, is compulsory. The FAC process is very much a bandwagon. There is a snowball's chance in hell your nomination will pass if the first response is an oppose. Make sure you have at least three people ready to swoop in and support it. Do this prior to your nomination.

Favoritism exists. Users have either 0, 1, or 2 FAs or 10/20+. Once you gain this community's trust, with more than three consecutive successful nominations, future ones will be a walk in the park. So do not let your momentum go once you have it. QPQ is important, do it. Whatever changes people ask you to make, make them. What really makes or breaks a music FAC is, are you a hardcore fan of an artist with an agenda to push who won't be reacting constructively to criticism, or are you an objective editor ready to shape the article how the whole community wants it, not just you?

Having gone through peer reviews does help, as this process has likely already earned those first three supports you need for your nomination to survive. Remember, an FAC will likely fail even if there is one (1) oppose. Commenters have full leverage over you, so just listen to every reasonable thing they have to say and maintain decorum. Rudeness to reviewers is a no-no. Finally, the opening statement of your nomination should not convey how big of a fan you are. That is counterproductive. You are here to convince the community this is an objectively well-written article, not to get them to pity pass it. Open with brief information about the subject and just say in brief the most recent steps you have undertaken to improve said article.

Reliable for FA
Billboard · MTV News · Rolling Stone · AllMusic · MTV UK · Yahoo! Music · Fuse · Clash · Slant Magazine · Spin · Time · The New York Times · The Guardian · The Independent · People · The Hollywood Reporter · Exclaim! · Variety · VH1

Reliable but unallowed at FA
Idolator · Radio.com · Dancing Astronaut · Us Weekly · Seventeen · Stereogum · The Fader · Cosmopolitan · Teen Vogue · Paper · Uproxx · Elle · Bustle · BuzzFeed

Unreliable
Daily Mail · The Sun · Headline Planet · HipHopDX · Highsnobiety

Notes
 * Use AllAccess for radio impact dates in the US, if not available go for FMQB or Radio & Records
 * If after removing all sources from the latter two subsections, you still have an article size >50kb, an FAC is worth it. Otherwise, good luck.

Aftermath
In 2022, music FAs being passed became much more normalized and various editors emerged with successful nominations.