Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/I Believe in You

I Believe in You

 * Note: The article in question has been moved to I Believe in You (Kylie Minogue song) to create a disambiguation page.

I believe that this article is worthy of being a featured article: it is well written, comprehensive, referenced, neutral and stable, and complies with the WP:MOS. It uses three images: two of single covers and one of the music video, and they have "acceptable copyright status". I really believe that this article meets the FA criteria -- getcrunk juice  contribs 00:41, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * (this is a self-nomination) -- getcrunk juice  contribs 00:46, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Nom and support! -- getcrunk juice  contribs 00:46, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


 * tentative support this is a pretty short but nice article about a single... I'm not sure I can say more than that but it appears to meet the FA criteria besides a couple unreferenced things which the submitter appears to be working on. Just another star in the night T 01:13, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Conditional Support. Like other FAs about songs, this article needs a section detailing the release of the songs, versions, etc. RyanG e rbil10 02:03, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Support I think the article it is well written and comprehensive. I'll try to help expand certain sections, but as of right now I think the article is very informative. — Underneath-it-All 02:58, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Object I think the article needs work. There is a great deal of passive voice, especially in the short lead, as "is" or "was" is the verb in every sentence (In particular, the phrase "The song was ..." is used often).  There are weasel word phrases and opinions, such as;
 * "The song takes its inspiration from 70s disco and 80s electro-pop music, and has been descibed as a nod to 80s band New Order." -- i.e., who described it as 80's New Order?
 * "The chorus is recognized as the highlight of the song..." is also an opinion -- who recognizes it as a highlight?
 * "The collaboration with Shears and Babbydaddy was seen as an unlikely collaboration." -- Seen by who?
 * "The music video has been compared to Dannii Minogue's music video for "I Begin To Wonder"." -- Who has compared it?, and so on.
 * The article is much too short, with paragraphs of only one or two sentences. There is also nothing which shows why this song is notable -- how did the recording process go?  Why was it a "unlikely collaboration"?  How has this song advanced / declined her career?  After these additions and a peer review, I'll be glad to evaluate the article again, but as it stands, it needs considerable work. --Ataricodfish 06:17, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I've sourced/removed your four weasel word points and added a bit about how the song returned Minogue to popularity in the American dance market. The song is notable because it is a charting single release from Kylie Minogue -- <FONT COLOR="#FF0000">getcrunk</FONT> <FONT COLOR="#3366FF">juice</FONT> <font face="Tahoma" color="#000033"> contribs 23:06, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but the article is still very much incomplete and needs tremendous work. Take a look at something like Real Love (song) or Just My Imagination (Running Away with Me) for examples of more complete Featured Articles on songs.  The articles tell the motivation for writing the song, how the songs were recorded, why, and how they were influental to the performer's career.  After reading the article, I fail to see how the song is important besides it being just another song Kylie recorded.  Also, there should probably be some book sources, or at least something besides Internet links.  My objection remains, and I would recommend that you place the article in Peer Review first as, despite your good intentions and admiration of Kylie, it's not ready for FA yet. --Ataricodfish 03:19, 22 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong Object The article is far too short and lacking in detail to be a featured article. In fact, without the charts and track listings the article would be almost laughingly short. In addition, was there any cultural impact from the song? The article also lacks bio info on the singer and lots more.--Alabamaboy 19:57, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * What do you mean by "the article lacks bio info on the singer"? Kylie Minogue is covered in the main Kylie Minogue article. I am not sure if you want me to bring some of that information into this article? -- <FONT COLOR="#FF0000">getcrunk</FONT> <FONT COLOR="#3366FF">juice</FONT> <font face="Tahoma" color="#000033"> contribs 23:06, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The article should still have some bio info about Minogue, along with a Main article link to the main article on her. If needed, bring a bit (not all) of the main article stuff into this article. Please note, though, that this is a minor issue with the article. The other issues I raised are more substantial.--Alabamaboy 00:42, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't think that the article is too short.. I have expanded the "Composition" and the "Chart performance" sections. And I do not believe that the single has impacted any cultures (it only reached the top five in most european countries) -- <FONT COLOR="#FF0000">getcrunk</FONT> <FONT COLOR="#3366FF">juice</FONT> <font face="Tahoma" color="#000033"> contribs 00:58, 22 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong Object. An overall short and choppy article. The prose is uncompelling: there is no flow or variance of sentence structure. Almost every sentence (especially in the lead) begins with "The song...". Secondly, the article fails the comprehensive section of the FA criteria. Not once does it discuss the history behind the music: the studio sessions, etc. Moreover, while it does talk of the "music", there is still a lot to discuss: the theme of the lyrics, the key in which the song is set (major or minor), the melody, time signature, the song structure (does it follow the verse-chorus form, AABA? etc) The writers quoted lyrics, but why? They have not discussed it indepth, nor have they commented on its strenght/weakness. It seems to be there to take up space. Thirdly, the article is poorly sourced. Just 6 sources are included, most of which are critical appreciation. The rest of the article that discusses "song composition" is not sourced (except for a quote), and if left this way, could be construed as original research. Fourth, there is a picture at music video, but how does it contribute significantly to the article? The caption reads something like "a scene from the video"(not a direct quote). However, you need to use that pic to help show something notable about the video. In its current state, it's there just for decoration. Good attempt, but this article needs much &mdash;and I do mean "much"&mdash; more work to be considered ready. I suggest peer review. I really hope the writers dont get discouraged; it has potential. Oran   e    (t)   (c)   (e)  22:01, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I have changed up the intro and there are now eleven sources, and I have changed the caption of the picture. I fully understand your second point and I will try and improve on that when I'm not busy. -- <FONT COLOR="#FF0000">getcrunk</FONT> <FONT COLOR="#3366FF">juice</FONT> <font face="Tahoma" color="#000033"> contribs 23:06, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I've attempted to improve on the discussion of the "music" (composition section). I hope I've done it right, I don't have much experience in that area. -- <FONT COLOR="#FF0000">getcrunk</FONT> <FONT COLOR="#3366FF">juice</FONT> <font face="Tahoma" color="#000033"> contribs 01:16, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * CommentI'm sorry, but no, you certainly have not. What you did was a direct cut and paste of the "music and structure" section of "We Belong Together", slightly altering text to "fit" your article, and I must say, I'm a bit disappointed: 1) its like reading a mirror article/total rip-off of "We Belong together", which is really weird, since the content in that article was written by yours truly, and 2) the text does not fit in another article, especially this one. You could have atleast altered the words just to make it less obvious. Moreover, unlike WBT, none of the new info in your article sourced, which brings us right back to original research. Changed vote to "strong object." Oran   e    (t)   (c)   (e)  02:56, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I used that format because I knew that WBT's article had a good "music/structure" section... I will alter the text further and find some more sources -- <FONT COLOR="#FF0000">getcrunk</FONT> <FONT COLOR="#3366FF">juice</FONT> <font face="Tahoma" color="#000033"> contribs 03:02, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * You could have used the same format without a direct copy and paste. Oran   e    (t)   (c)   (e)  03:10, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Also, I know FACs can be brutal, and the objectors can be a real pain in the ass, but please just hang in there ok? Oran   e    (t)   (c)   (e)  03:12, 22 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment→ I have realized that with the addition to the music section comes a deterioration of prose and coherence. Examples:
 * ""I Believe in You" includes three sections of melodies, each with Minogue in slightly different emotions" &mdash; I just don't get what this sentence is saying. "Three sections of melodies"? Also, what are the different emotions?
 * "This melody is maintained throughout the song, except for occasional pauses for Minogue's verses" &mdash;poor musical explanation.
 * "Written and recorded for Ultimate Kylie during the summer of 2004 in London, the song takes its inspiration from disco and 80s new wave electro-pop music and has been descibed as similar to 80s band New Order. This is evident in the rhythm of the song: the song opens with a keyboard playing the choral melody in a 4/4 time signature." &mdash;Does the fact that the song opens with a keyboard in a 4/4 time signature means that it is inspired by 80s disco? How come?
 * "During the second section, she lowers her tone and sings in a sweet voice" &mdash; are you implying that she was singing in a higher pitch in the first verse? Also, who said her voice was "sweet", you or a critic?
 * ""Nothing lasts for ever, but together til the end, I'll give you everything I have again and again," Minogue sings during the bridge of the song." &mdash; what is notable about this section that merits a quote/special mention? I would really advise that you do some research. Oran   e    (t)   (c)   (e)  19:41, 22 March 2006 (UTC)


 *  Conditional Support -I'm a firm believer in article length not always having anything to do with quality, and on quality grounds it's there. However, I DO have a problem with 3 fair use images. The cover should stay, the music video, noted for it's effect, is beautifully illustrated. The alternate cover, however, adds precisely nothing to the article and stretches fair use. It needs to be dumped. - M <sup style="color:#990011">ask [[Image:Flag_of_Alaska.svg|20 px]] 02:38, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I guess you're right. I've removed the alternate cover image -- <FONT COLOR="#FF0000">getcrunk</FONT> <FONT COLOR="#3366FF">juice</FONT> <font face="Tahoma" color="#000033"> contribs 02:45, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * And now you get full support - M <sup style="color:#990011">ask [[Image:Flag_of_Alaska.svg|20 px]] 05:35, 22 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Object please have the article peer reviewed first. Zzzzz 09:52, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Object Reads like a well-written fan piece rather than the 1-in-1100 that is a Featured Article. There's even typos (which I'm fixing as I find them). Should be peer reviewed first. --kingboyk 13:35, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Object. There are multiple typos throughout the article and the subject ("I Believe in You") is incorrectly spelling in several places, where "in" appears capitalized. The chart trajectories need to be removed and replaced with a graph similar to those included in We Belong Together and Cool (song). In addition, where is the information on the music? What chord is it in? What is the time signature? Are there any bass guitars, a piano, or even a clarinet? Refer the article to peer review. &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 23:10, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment- I would advise any author to ditch the graph style. It takes up more memory and is less exact then a chart. Considering We Belong Together did not make it, I'd also advise any author to take ideas from that article with a grain of salt. - M <sup style="color:#990011">ask [[Image:Flag_of_Alaska.svg|20 px]] 20:50, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment&mdash; Just because an article did not make it, that does not mean that it cannot be used as a model. Most of the objections were on image copyright and a few instances of poor prose, not comprehensiveness nor content. i.e. it can be used. Oran   e    (t)   (c)   (e)  00:49, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Comment - should be very careful about quoting lyrics. They are copyright and governed by the same fair use rules as images and sound samples. If lyrics are to be quoted there must be a reason and they must be discussed in sufficient depth, that the inclusion of an extract from the lyrics is necessary. This is not the case here. Two sizeable chunks of lyrics are reproduced and I can't see any reason for it. One section is just there - no explanation - is it just for decoration? What is the point you are trying to make with these lyrics? The other bit is where Kylie sings "in a sweet voice" (whatever that means) and in this context whatever lyrics she is singing is irrelevant as the point seems to be about her "sweet voice". Please remove these. Rossrs 00:04, 26 March 2006 (UTC)