Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Love. Angel. Music. Baby.


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted 16:08, 30 July 2007.

Love. Angel. Music. Baby.
previous FAC

I didn't monitor the my watchlist while Hey Ya! was at FAC, so there were some problems with it when it was at its last FAC. I've done some copyediting and reorganization of the article. I removed some of the less useful links since it was looking pretty blue, and I removed some citations when there were several consecutive sentences going to the same one. The section about its impact has been condensed to remove stuff from unreliable sources, and it's now a little more clear on the markets that it had an impact on. If possible, I'd like to address any objections as soon as possible since I'll be away next week and may not have computer access, so if you do have objections, they should get taken care of within the day. 17Drew 08:14, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Weak Oppose No references in lead section, Track listing section and Production section. --Kaypoh 09:08, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Those sections aren't supposed to be referenced. The lead only needs references when there's information not contained in the main article text.  The latter two are inherently referenced to the album.  17Drew 16:01, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * This is correct. Velten 17:53, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I Agree. Luxurious.gaurav 03:40, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for answer. You all agree about that, so I will strike my oppose. --Kaypoh 09:23, 24 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Strong Support - I have been working on the article for quite some time and i really like it. It is my one the favourite album articles. Luxurious.gaurav 10:23, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Support. Good work. Velten 17:53, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose Some copy-editting needed.
 * "When the two began working on a song that Stefani stated was too personal, she left to visit Kanal, who played her a track on which he had been working and which became "Crash", another single from the album." - needs rephrasing and maybe splitting into two sentences.
 * "The Harajuku Girls are frequently mentioned on the album, with the song "Harajuku Girls" entirely dedicated to them." - the "with" is ungrammatical. It's best to use a semicolon instead, ie. "The Harajuku Girls are frequently mentioned on the album; the song "Harajuku Girls" is entirely dedicated to them."
 * "Love. Angel. Music. Baby. takes influence from a variety of 1980s genres, with one reviewer stating..." - the "with" is ungrammatical.
 * "L.A.M.B. also includes various styles of music" - the "also" is redundant.
 * "It received very mixed reviews, with several criticizing its repetitive use" - the "with" is ungrammatical and the "very" is redundant. Epbr123 22:32, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * ✅ For some reason, I was under the impression that the with construction you pointed out was correct, but it looks like you're right.  I've made the changes, and I found and fixed another sentence that had the same construction.  17Drew 06:16, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose removed. Epbr123 10:32, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Comments Under "Songs" section: Otherwise, this article is very well written and well-sourced. Good work. ♫ Cricket02 15:55, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * In discussion of the song "What You Waiting For": The song received very positive reviews, often noted as a highlight of the album."[23]  Firstly, I would remove the word "very" for NPOV.  Secondly, the reference from pitchforkmedia.com is just a review, and does not support the statement that the song is "often noted as a highlight of the album".  Is there a better source for this statement?
 * Its single was moderately successful, reaching the top ten in most countries.[24] The source for this statement, MusicSquare is a user-edited site.  Where did those stats come from?  Was is http://acharts.us/?  Can that source be used instead?
 * The second single, "Rich Girl" charted equally well.[25] Same thing, using MusicSquare as a source.
 * "Hollaback Girl", the third track, became the album's best-selling and most popular single. According to whom?  It was written as a response to a derogatory comment by grunge musician Courtney Love,[26]  I am a bit confused by this source (Rubenstein, Atoosa. "Courtney Love speaks about Gwen Stefani". Seventeen (August 2004): pg. 19.)  As this is not an online source and I can't confirm what it says, by the title, it seems to me this article is about Courtney Love, and I question whether it supports the statement that the "song was written in response to a derogatory comment."  Any way to elaborate on this, maybe by using a direct quote in the reference?
 * The fourth track "Cool" was very well-received by critics,[20][28]  Again, please remove the word "very" for more of a NPOV.
 * The sixth single "Crash" was not heavily promoted and sold poorly, unable to reach the top forty in any country.[31] Who says it was not heavily promoted?  And again, a MusicSquare source that is user edited.  Where did the user get the info?  I think MusicSquare is an informative site, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but I do question using it as a reliable source.
 * Please cite the descriptions used in the audio samples box to justify fair use.
 * I think I've taken care of most of the bullets (diff), but I do want to make sure of some stuff. The "highlight of the album" part came from the What You Waiting For? article, which has a paragraph of such reviews.  Would it be good to use the Entertainment Weekly and Pitchfork reviews of the album (the one there's only for the single).  Both are in the article right now, and point out the song as a highlight.  I'm not sure what you mean about citing the descriptions.  If you're referring to the captions in the article, the information should already be cited in the main article text. 17Drew 23:30, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, much better sourcing on chart positions. As concerns, The song received very positive reviews, often noted as a highlight of the album."[23] - Yes, I would use the Entertainment Weekly source for LAMB as well because it specifically cites that the song is a "one of the album's undeniable highs", and supports the text.  But...unless you have multiple sources for this statement, you cannot use the word "often", see?  I would recast the sentence somehow and attribute it, like maybe The song received positive reviews,[23] noted to be "one of the album's undeniable highs", by Entertainment Weekly.[ref]  I do see that the captions in the audio samples box are cited within the main text, but for clarity, I would just be redundant and add the same sources to the captions within the box as well.  This way no one has to search through the text to be sure those captions are sourced.  Christ Illusion would be a good example. ♫ Cricket02 03:10, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I think I've taken care of everything then. 17Drew 03:28, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Excellent. Great work.  Support  ♫ Cricket02 04:42, 28 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Support - Very nice work, as per usual. Lara  ♥Love  19:19, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.