Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Black Christian Siriano gown of Billy Porter/archive1

Black Christian Siriano gown of Billy Porter

 * Nominator(s): &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 21:33, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Actor Billy Porter's star had been rising since his 2018 breakout role in Pose. He spent the 2018/2019 awards season tearing up the red carpet, culminating in the two fashion moments that stamped his name on fashion history for good: the silver suit with fuchsia-lined cape worn at the 2019 Golden Globes, followed up by the black velvet tuxedo ball gown he wore to the 2019 Oscars. The tuxedo gown is widely regarded as a groundbreaking moment in Oscars history – he is the first man to have worn a gown on the red carpet – and it remains one of Porter's most memorable looks. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 21:33, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Two tiny things For the coords, I did the GA review to my FAC standards. Part of that, I did one of my source reviews. -- Guerillero Parlez Moi 21:48, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Purcell 2013 needs an access date
 * Grady 2021 has a date inconsistency
 * Both fixed &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 04:41, 2 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Support -- Guerillero  Parlez Moi 18:10, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Support from Vami
Comments starting... Wednesday. – ♠Vami _IV†♠  21:53, 1 May 2022 (UTC)


 * ok tomorrow, after cinco de mayo festivities – ♠Vami _IV†♠  04:42, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
 * back, with stuffed llama – ♠Vami _IV†♠  22:02, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

I can't find much to comment about - good job!

X – ♠Vami _IV†♠  22:02, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Speaking to Vogue in 2019, he said "This look was interesting because it's not drag. I'm not a drag queen, I'm a man in a dress." [...] saying "I don't understand why my putting on a dress causes this much strife in your life." [...] stating "If you don't like it, don't watch it" [...] saying "I don't think any man has ever worn a gown on the Oscars red carpet before." Should be a comma between "said"/"stated" and the quotation.
 * Done
 * Since 2019, Porter has become a household name as a fashion icon I'm not so sure about the present-tense here; it's not very durable in the encyclopedic sense, and the rest of the paragraph uses past-tense. I'd have written this as "Following his appearance at the 91st Academy Awards, Porter became [...]".
 * Done, your wording is much better.
 * Thanks for the review Vami! &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 02:57, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Comments from Sdkb
Starting with the lead...
 * for his breakout role in FX drama Pose Should there be a "the" before FX? &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 22:06, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * It feels awkward putting a "the", but it's not a hill I'll die on if you or other reviewers feel strongly about it.
 * 2018/2019 awards season Per MOS:SPECIFICLINK, I'd suggest changing to 2018–19 film awards season. I note that 2018/2019 appears allowed per MOS:SLASH. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 22:06, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Fixed both links
 * Link to Fashion journalism over fashion press, perhaps? &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 22:06, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Changed to "fashion journalists" and linked
 * It cemented Porter's status as a household name This is a strong statement for which I'll be looking for strong sourcing in the body. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 22:06, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I didn't want to overcite it, so there's 3 citations in the first sentence under "Legacy," but that's cherry-picked - lots more that I didn't cite in that sentence (but are elsewhere in the article) have similar phrasing.
 * As a side note, as of Vami's review, I have reworded it to "Porter's status as a celebrity and as a fashion icon." But I still think the overall sourcing substantiates it easily. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 02:57, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Porter has described the outfit as a piece of political art intended to drive a conversation about men's fashion and masculinity, for which it has received both praise and criticism from fashion writers, academics, and the general public. My thoughts on this might evolve once I read the body more deeply, but at first glance, this reads as both bothsidesish. Perhaps clarify that it was mostly conservatives doing the criticizing and add a little more overall on the reception to the lead. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 22:06, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Amusingly (to me anyway) I was trying to avoid pounding on the cliche of "evil conservatives hate gays." But some cliches are unavoidable, I suppose. I reworded on this basis, but not sure how much more about the reception I can add to the lead without repeating myself and/or getting to the point of no longer being a summary.
 * As always Sdkb thank you for your comments, I appreciate them. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 04:41, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Apologies for the delay here. I'm still planning to continue with my comments, but have just had a very busy week, so leaving this as a placeholder. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 08:00, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Not to be a pest but - are you planning to return? &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 20:03, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Apologies again. I might, but with everything going on currently, I can't guarantee I'll have space anytime soon. The coordinators certainly shouldn't read any reluctance into my absence—if others are at support, then go ahead and promote, and don't let me hold anything up. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 21:20, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Aoba47
I am leaving this up as a placeholder. If I do not post a review by this time next week, please ping me. I am very happy to see this article in the FAC space. I keep meaning to work on fashion-related articles so I will use this as a reason to do that. I look forward to reading this article in the near future. Aoba47 (talk) 00:01, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

I hope this review is helpful. Apologies for some of the more nitpick-y points. Once all of my comments are addressed, I will read through the article one more time just to make sure that I've done a thorough job with everything. Just as clarification, my review is primarily focused on the prose. Aoba47 (talk) 02:19, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * While not entirely necessary, for File:Billy Porter Oscars gown on Sesame Street set.jpg, I would include an archived version of the source link in the WP:FUR box just to avoid any potential annoyance in the future.
 * Good thinking - done.
 * Have you considered using an infobox similar to meat dress of Lady Gaga? I actually prefer the way that the article currently exists (i.e. with just the photo), but I still wanted to bring this to your attention if you were unaware of it.
 * I am aware and have decided not to do so. For all that I like infoboxes in general, I don't feel that they add much to articles like this that don't really have a lot of "standardized" information.
 * That makes sense to me. Again, I do not like the infobox as I agree with your rationale, but I still wanted to make sure it was discussed. Aoba47 (talk) 16:49, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I have a question about this part, criticism from more conservative commentators. Is the "more" necessary? It implies to me that those were praised him were more liberal (and while that may be true), I wouldn't be surprised if some people who identified as more conservative enjoyed or were indifferent about this outfit or if some people who identified as more liberal were critical of this outfit. I just may be too nitpick-y.
 * For those who commented publicly (both public figures and random social media users), reaction to the dress was pretty polarized along liberal/conservative lines. I can take out the "more", which just leaves "as well as criticism from conservative commentators". Should I go with "conservative-leaning"?
 * It is probably fine as it currently stands. I understand your point, and I think it should be fine. Aoba47 (talk) 16:49, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * For this part, Pose, which has been called his breakout role, I would say something along the lines of "which critics have called his breakout role" to specify who has called his role this way.
 * Done
 * For instances like this, said that the outfit "changed everything for me.", I believe the period should be on the outside of the quotation marks as from my understanding, punctuation is only put inside quotation marks if it is a full quote. I've noticed a few other instances of this in the article.
 * Per MOS:LQ, WP uses "logical quotation," where the punctuation is included within the quotation marks if it was included in the original. In this case,
 * Interesting. Thank you for the link, and I will leave this for other reviewers to discuss if they wish to do so. Aoba47 (talk) 16:49, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Whoops, I saved that without finishing my thought. In the case you highlighted the period was in the original, so I've left it. I did go through and double check the rest of the quotes for punctuation placement and I found some that were not MOS:LQ compliant, so those should now all be fixed now thanks to you.
 * For File:Christian Siriano (12927).jpg, it may be beneficial to include where the photo was taken in the caption (i.e. OZY Fest).
 * Done
 * This is probably personal preference, but for this part, Porter and his stylist Sam Ratelle approached the designer, I think it would better to say "him" instead of "the designer". I agree with The problem with elegant variation, but it is an essay so it is open to interpretation.
 * I actually wound up rewriting the entire first two paragraphs of Design & development because I noticed structural problems; this particular issue is fixed, and the section is much better overall for you getting me to take another look at it
 * Very nice. I will re-read it sometime tomorrow morning before I go into work. Aoba47 (talk) 03:22, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry for being nitpick-y, but I have a comment for this part, week, with Siriano and Ratelle working up. I'd avoid the sentence construction that is "with X verb-ing". It is a note that I have received in the FAC space and I have seen in the FAC space. I do not have a strong personal opinion about it.
 * Tweaked, and no need to apologize :)
 * For this sentence, On social media, the dress was compared to a similar 1980s look by ball culture icon Hector Xtravaganza., I'd clarify who is making these comparisons. Was it just random social media users or was it fashion journalists, etc. who used social media to report on or discuss this?
 * Paper magazine says "the Internet quickly latched on to the idea that Porter...was paying tribute to ball legend Hector Xtravaganza." Looks like the House of Xtravaganza Instagram posted about it, although I haven't found any sources that say whether they posted it first and other people hopped on, or if other people were talking about it and their Insta picked up on it and posted.
 * Thank you for the explanation and the revision to this part looks good to me. Aoba47 (talk) 03:22, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I have a question about attribution in the article. There are instances where the author and work are attributed (i.e. Erica Gonzales of Harper's Bazaar wrote) and other instances where it is just the work (i.e. Vanity Fair placed him on its). I would be consistent with one way or the other.
 * I honestly just do it to break up the monotony of "Vogue said this. Vanity Fair said that. Vox said this other thing." No particular criteria.
 * Understandable. This should not be an issue with me. Aoba47 (talk) 03:22, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Were there any instances of black men criticizing this outfit? I'm just curious because there's a discussion on how this is "assault on masculinity" and a part of "the emasculation of black men" so I wondered if any black male journalists talked about it.
 * (It is a little rich to see conservative white women coming to the defense of black masculinity, isn't it?) The complaining from high-profile public figures like Lahren and Senator Rapert was reported on and therefore preserved, but most of the criticism was randos posting on social media and was therefore more ephemeral. I didn't find any RSes that reported any criticism specifically from black male journalists.
 * It is interesting to say the least. Thank you for the explanation and for looking into this point. Aoba47 (talk) 03:22, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the random question, but have any fashion critics (or critics in general) compared this outfit to how women used tuxedos as a way to initiate discussions on gender? People like Marlene Dietrich come to my mind.
 * Not a random question at all! The long and short of it is, not specifically, at least that I found. I did turn up a museum exhibit on nonbinary fashion that featured a photo of this dress and one of Dietrich's tuxes, so I put that in the article.
 * I appreciate it. I could not find any specific either when I did a very brief search. The addition looks good because it is interesting to read about how this outfit was displayed with others and I think that gives it more context if that makes sense. Aoba47 (talk) 03:22, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
 * This is outside the scope of this FAC, but I am curious if there is a way to rename List of dresses so it is more immediately clear that it is a list of individual dresses? It could already be clear though and I think this list is very helpful.
 * I've boldly moved it.
 * Understandable. It is a good list, but I can understand why you'd remove it. Aoba47 (talk) 03:22, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Oops, no, not removed - moved to List of individual dresses! :)
 * Thank you for the clarification. I misread that part lol. Aoba47 (talk) 14:12, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I will re-read the article tomorrow before I go into work. I do agree with Sdkb that I think it should be, the FX drama Pose, as I have always seen "the" used before the network in this context. It is a little strange because it is not the only or the definitive drama on the network, but that is from my personal experience. I would also specify the series that the season that the Bimini Bon-Boulash wedding dress appeared. Something like "a wedding dress worn by Bimini Bon-Boulash on RuPaul's Drag Race UK's second series" would seem more specific and helpful to me. Apologies for the delay. I do not imagine I will find anything else in my second reading. Aoba47 (talk) 03:22, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Added the second season thing as well as the "the" for FX. And there's no need to apologize lol, you've been super on top of responding to me. Don't sweat it yo. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 04:09, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for addressing everything. I support this FAC for promotion based on the prose. Aoba47 (talk) 15:58, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Comments

 * "He wore jewellery by Oscar Heyman" - I suppose it's probably obvious that the "he" is Porter, but it's been a while since he was mentioned, and multiple other men have been mentioned since, so maybe change "he" to "Porter"
 * Done


 * "Ratelle confirmed that the resemblance was unintentional, but stated they felt" - does Ratelle use they pronouns? If not, who does the "they" refer to, exactly?  Also it should probably be "stated that" not just "stated"
 * The full quote is in the plural ("we felt honored") referring to him and Porter so I unthinkingly went with the plural pronoun when paraphrasing. Tweaked.


 * "Porter described the jacket as a political statement" - surely it was the dress that did this? Or the entire ensemble?  Not just the jacket?
 * I literally have no idea why I put jacket instead of anything else, lol. Fixed.


 * " Vanity Fair placed him" =? " Vanity Fair placed Porter"
 * Fixed


 * "Fashion critics have described the tuxedo gown as an iconic Oscars dress." - the last two words link to red carpet fashion, but literally the exact words "red carpet fashion" appear quite a bit earlier in the article, so surely the link would be better placed there?
 * Fixed


 * "CNN Style writer Marianna Cerini remembered his outfit" => either "CNN Style writer Marianna Cerini remembered Porter's outfit" or just "CNN Style writer Marianna Cerini remembered the outfit"
 * Fixed


 * "rhetorically asking if it could "change whole systems?" => "rhetorically asking if it could "change whole systems"."
 * Done


 * "A photograph of the gown was featured at "Gender Bending Fashion,"" => "A photograph of the gown was featured at "Gender Bending Fashion","
 * Done


 * That's what I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:09, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
 * thanks for your comments, sorry it took me so long to reply! &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 09:35, 13 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:49, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Source review (pass)
I will leave a few comments in a bit. It seems like there's been quite a few prose comments (but not a source review) so I'll check the sources.
 * Guerillero actually did an FA-level source review when he did the GA for the article, but there's been quite a bit of revision and addition since.

Some formatting comments in general (from this revision):
 * Be consistent whether you include ISSNs in newspaper sources. For example, the ISSNs of The Times and NYT are displayed in the article, whereas the ISSNs of Guardian and Los Angeles Times are not displayed even though these papers have ISSNs. There may be other sources where this issue exists as well.
 * I've added ISSN to every source that had one.


 * Also be consistent whether you include publication place in book sources. Ref 44 (How to Read a Dress: A Guide to Changing Fashion from the 16th to the 21st Century) has a publication place here, but it is the only book with a publication place.
 * I've added it to the reference for Gender(s), but the template documentation for the location parameter says to "omit when the publication name includes place," so I have not added it for Fashion on the Red Carpet, whose publisher is named for its location.


 * Check to see whether you are consistently wikilinking the names of newspapers/magazines/websites in citations. You generally should either choose to link them on the first mention only, on all mentions, or not at all. In this article, the use of wikilinks are inconsistent - for example, Paper (magazine) is linked in 2 of 2 citations, while Vogue (magazine) is linked in 1 of 3 citations.
 * The double-linked Paper magazine thing was actually an unintentional duplicate ref - not sure how it happened. The rest should be consistent with only the first instance being linked.

I will leave a few more comments later. – Epicgenius (talk) 20:44, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
 * What makes the following sources reliable?
 * 25. Rosseinsky, Katie (February 25, 2019). "Billy Porter wins the Oscars red carpet with velvet tuxedo gown". Evening Standard.
 * See my response below which I think applies to this as well. I'm willing to lose this one if it's really a problem, since it's supported by other citations.
 * 35. Rekstis, Emily (September 21, 2021). "Wings! Feathers! Fringe! Look back at Billy Porter's most show-stopping red carpet moments". Us Weekly.
 * Gonna copy-paste my reply to Guillero from the GA - "Arguably an opinion piece, which tend to be given more leeway in my experience. Given that their primary line of business is to write about celebrity fashion, I think it's reasonable/within due weight to cite that it's their opinion that this is one of Porter's best looks."
 * 48. Petrarca, Marisa; Holender, Samantha (November 5, 2021). "Billy Porter Apologizes to Harry Styles for Slamming His 'Vogue' Dress Cover". Us Weekly.
 * Removed as unnecessary
 * Thanks for your comments, Epic, hopefully the responses are suitable. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:35, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
 * @Premeditated Chaos, thanks for the responses. I'm glad that Guerillero did a source check during the GA - it doesn't hurt to have a second pair of eyes, though. I'm now convinced that refs 25 and 35 are fine and all the other issues are resolved. Spot checks of 8 sources did not reveal anything out of the ordinary, so I'll pass this source review. – Epicgenius (talk) 13:13, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Image review
Image licences, rationales, ALT text and uses seem OK to me. I would probably recommend looking for a non-Daily Mail source, though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk • contribs)
 * Thanks, I've added the original Sesame Street Instagram as a source, but since Insta doesn't seem to cooperate with the Wayback Machine very well, I've kept the Daily Mail archive link with a comment as to why. (I also swapped the image for the Sesame Street Instagram one as it doesn't have a watermark). &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 20:03, 17 May 2022 (UTC)


 * , just wondering if you guys are looking for anything else here? I have several prose supports, two source reviews, and an image review. Sdkb has indicated they may not be able to provide more comments in the near future and it's been a few days since any other comments have been left. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 06:29, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi PMC, I don't think there's anything more you need to do before a coord checks this over in detail, shouldn't be too long... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:29, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 18:38, 29 May 2022 (UTC)