Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The First Vision/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 18 July 2023 [1].

The First Vision[edit]

Nominator(s): Heartfox (talk) 06:07, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I started work on this in summer 2021 but for some reason only returned to it now. In the same two-year time frame, Mariah Carey had six number-one songs on the US Billboard Hot 100 chart. You can learn about her rise to fame by watching the video this article is about (at least from the record label's point of view ... for a better option, choose her memoir lol). Thanks in advance for any comments :) Heartfox (talk) 06:07, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review[edit]

I believe the article's singular image is properly licensed; it has ALT text and has an acceptable caption. This article passes the image review, methinks. Unlimitedlead (talk) 12:19, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Aoba47[edit]

  • For this part of the lead, (snippets of the album's other singles, "I Don't Wanna Cry" and "There's Got to Be a Way"), I would use something along the lines of "future singles" to give further clarification that this video album was released prior to the release and promotion of those singles. The current wording is somewhat unclear, especially if someone is not completely familiar with the timeline and dates with this album and its singles.
  • For this part, (promotional music videos), remove "promotional". It is a redundancy as music videos by their very nature are promotional.

I hope these comments are helpful so far. I am not seeing anything major that needs attention in this article. I have two nitpick-y comments, but that is it so far. I will re-read the article a few more times over the weekend to make sure I have not missed anything. Best of luck with this FAC. Aoba47 (talk) 17:16, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All done :) Heartfox (talk) 18:36, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the response. I will look through the article again tomorrow, but I do not imagine finding anything major though. Aoba47 (talk) 00:11, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Everything looks good to me. I support this FAC for promotion based on the prose. Just out of curiosity, did Carey address this video album in her memoir? I have a copy of the book, but I have not gotten around to reading it yet. I am doubtful that she would mention this so it does not interfere with my support in any way. Hope you have a wonderful rest of your weekend! Aoba47 (talk) 20:18, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There's no mention of it in the book. Thanks for the comments, Heartfox (talk) 21:15, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. Thank you for the clarification. Aoba47 (talk) 21:40, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fieari[edit]

I have a prose concern for the 2nd paragraph of the lead. The sentences are disjointed and stilted, without flow from one sentence to the next. Everything in the paragraph is related to a single subject as they should be, but each sentence is entirely separate from the others. You could rearrange most of the the sentences without anyone noticing. While the FA criteria no longer states "brilliant prose", I still think this could be worded in a more engaging way that isn't quite so stiff. Fieari (talk) 05:27, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you quote something specifically that seems stiff so I can better understand what you are noticing? Heartfox (talk) 12:47, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • As an off-the-top-of-my-head example "Critics focused on Carey's depiction and performances in The First Vision. Some critics considered it insightful and others opined it projected her in a sexual manner. They praised Carey's live performances as an effective vocal showcase." could be recast as something like 'Critics focused on Carey's depiction and performances in The First Vision, with some considering it insightful and others opining that it projected her in a sexual manner; there was general praise for Carey's live performances as an effective vocal showcase.' Fieari, is this the sort of thing you meant? Gog the Mild (talk) 17:02, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from SNUGGUMS[edit]

  • It feels odd to have "The First Vision received reviews regarding Carey's depiction and performances." without anything on general reception level. Unless you can find a piece discussing how that was overall favorable/mixed/unfavorable, I'd rework this into something along the lines of "Critics focused on Carey's depiction and performances in The First Vision".
    • Done
  • No need to link commonly recognized terms like "digital download" or "Platinum" per WP:OVERLINK
    • Unlinked
  • If you can find when the live performance at Club Tatou took place, then I'd add such detail
    • Added
  • Per WP:REPCITE, there's no need to use the same citation more than once in a row within a paragraph like you did with the Rolling Stone review under "Critical reception"
    • Removed
  • For those unfamiliar with the "CIN" acronym, I'd spell it out like you did with CRIA
    • Spelled out
  • Since "Video Insider" doesn't have an article or appear likely to warrant one in the near future, let's unlink that
    • Unlinked

Once the above is all addressed, you should be good to go, and I'm not sure either what Fieari meant about the prose being "stiff". SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 14:58, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for the comments! I believe I have addressed everything. Heartfox (talk) 16:01, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My pleasure, and now I support the nomination! :) SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 17:22, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source review[edit]

  • The citations are all structured well and use reliable, high-quality sources that I would expect for a music article. I appreciate that the citations are archived when possible.
  • I did a brief spot check, and the information matches the citations and supports the information cited in the article. I have a few questions about the citations below though.
  • I have a question about the Chris Nickson book. Open Library uses Mariah Carey Revisited: Her Story as the title, but the cover image does not match that. When I look elsewhere, I see Mariah Carey Revisited: The Unauthorized Biography or some variant of that used instead which seems to be a better match to the title. I do not see Her Story on the cover.
    • The copyright page shows the title Mariah Carey revisited. Her Story is given as a subtitle.
      • That is what I get for judging a book by its cover lol. Thank you for the clarification about this point. Aoba47 (talk) 19:16, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Citations 12 and 13 appear to be the same. I do not see a clear reason to repeat them.
    • Oops; removed duplicate
  • This is more of a clarification question. I looked at the Dennis Hurt review during my spot-check and I think it was interesting how he identifies Carey as white and talks about her connection with gospel music and "black culture". Obviously, she is biracial and not just white, but looking at this review made me wonder if other critics commented on this part of the interview footage or commented on her race as related to this video album.
    • The review itself received coverage but I consider it out of scope for this article and I did not read any other comments about her race in regard to the video
      • I am not surprised that this review received coverage, but I agree that would be outside of the scope of the article. Thank you for the clarification that other reviewers did not discuss this in their coverage. Aoba47 (talk) 19:16, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Everything looks solid to me. I just have a few minor questions/comments. It is impressive that you were able to find all of this for an older video album. Let me know if you have any questions, but once everything is addressed, this would pass my source review without any issues. Aoba47 (talk) 18:49, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing this, I hope I have addressed everything. Heartfox (talk) 19:10, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am glad that I could help when and where I can. Thank you for addressing everything. This passes my source review. Aoba47 (talk) 19:16, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Gog the Mild[edit]

Recusing to review.

  • "The Canadian Recording Industry Association certified it Gold in that country". Is "in that country" necessary? Is a reader likely to think that the Canadian Recording Industry Association was certifying sales for anywhere else? I note that this additional explanation is not present in the main article.
    • Removed
  • "Gold ... Platinum". Why the upper-case initial letters?
    • Removed
  • "she began singing as a young girl". Do we have an actual age?
    • She doesn't say a specific age, just before she could talk and at "a very young age"
  • Link "background singers".
    • Linked
  • "In non-VHS releases, her performances of "Love Takes Time" and "Vision of Love" at Club Tatou are subsequently provided." Might this be better as 'In subsequent non-VHS releases, her performances of "Love Takes Time" and "Vision of Love" at Club Tatou are provided'?
    • Yes
  • "Carey's live performances received positive reviews." Just checking that means what it says. Ie, not something like "The recordings of Carey's live performances received positive reviews.' or 'Carey's live performances in the video received positive reviews.'
    • Added "the recordings of"
  • Link cover - to cover version.
    • Linked
  • "the Chart Information Network (CIN) Music Video chart". Why the initial upper-case letters for "Mucic Video"?
    • Converted to lower-case

Clear, concise, well written - fine work. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:10, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for jumping into this one. Heartfox (talk) 00:10, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My pleasure. An easy read and in such good shape there was little for me to suggest. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:52, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/The_First_Vision/archive1&oldid=1166031957"