Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/City of Angels (Thirty Seconds to Mars song)/archive4

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 15:21, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

---

City of Angels (Thirty Seconds to Mars song)

City of Angels (Thirty Seconds to Mars song) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

• Featured article candidates/City of Angels (Thirty Seconds to Mars song)/archive1
• Featured article candidates/City of Angels (Thirty Seconds to Mars song)/archive2
• Featured article candidates/City of Angels (Thirty Seconds to Mars song)/archive3
• Featured article candidates/City of Angels (Thirty Seconds to Mars song)/archive4

Nominator(s): Earthh (talk) 18:12, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

"City of Angels" is one of the most memorable and iconic songs recorded by Thirty Seconds to Mars. Since the first review in September 2014, the article underwent a copyediting treatment and recently received a peer review. I believe that it is very close to the FA criteria. I would ask the editors who oppose to provide their reason for such and add additional comments how can I improve the article. Thank you. Earthh (talk) 18:12, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Resolved concerns from SNUGGUMS

I only have these concerns: One chart position alone isn't enough for lead; charts like Portugal and UK Rock singles are worth adding Fixed. Nominations for the video should be included in lead Done. "Vulture" shouldn't have italics, and should link to New York (magazine) Fixed. Is "Inquisitr" the best source to use? It appears in the critical reception, there's nothing wrong with its use in that section.--Earthh (talk) 18:43, 27 March 2015 (UTC) This is quite close to being FA-material. Snuggums (talk / edits) 20:27, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Support meets FA standards now Snuggums (talk / edits) 19:00, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Support. After a few small edits, I can once again affirm my confidence in this article's suitability for FA status. Nice job. Tezero (talk) 06:14, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Mkativerata comments

Some initial comments:

• Is there a source for '"City of Angels" was met with general acclaim from music critics.'? As a summary sentence, it is a nice way to commence the section of the article, but if there is no source it is surely original research. The equivalent section for the music video doesn't have a summary sentence of this kind, and it looks fine.

• Kerrang! magazine says "Upon the album release, City of Angels was widely acclaimed by most commentators". I've put this as a source. I've also found a source for the critical acclaim the music video received, adding a summary sentence in the reception section.

• '"City of Angels" received critical acclaim from music critics, who commended the composition, the track's lyrical content, and Leto's vocal performance.' - what about the negative reviews? This sentence implies that the critics were unanimous. (Also, consider the repetition of "critic*").

• I've put "City of Angels received general acclaim from music critics", as the critical reception says. 'general acclaim' means that it got mostly positive reviews against a couple of mixed ones.

• "The video was positively reviewed by critics who complimented the simplicity and cohesion with the song's message." - a comma would help here.

• Fixed.

• The "Composition and theme" section gives us an overview of the form of the song, but only until the chorus that follows the first verse. Can this be completed? Anything about keys/harmony?

• As noted in the previous FAC, there's no sheet music published at Musicnotes.com and I couldn't examine the song's structure in depth. I've added something about the bridge and the drum-heavy climax.--Earthh (talk) 14:34, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Support. There are a few too many passive-voice sentences and a few too many unattributed quotes (eg "gently burbling synthesisers") for my taste. I'd encourage these to be tweaked but would not oppose over them. It's a fairly strong article - I don't mind the number of (attributed) quotes, which was criticised in the last FAC. The only question to my mind is whether the prose, which is certainly competent, amounts to "engaging". All the other criteria are satisfied, and on balance I think the prose is good enough. --Mkativerata (talk) 01:44, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Media & source check by Retrohead

• Single artwork is properly licensed; other images are under free use.
• The audio file length is 27s, but the caption says it's 30. You may also reduce the audio quality to 60–70 kbps.

• Reduced.

• Did you change the description (in the article) to fit the actual audio length?

• Done.

• Is LadyGunn (ref 4) an appropriate source for FAs? I see the interview is credited, but it doesn't hurt to ask.

• As noted in the peer review, LadyGunn is an independent magazine and that reference is an interview with Leto. I could remove it if it isn't reliable enough.

• If you can find a better reference, go for it. But if this was resolved at the PR, I wouldn't make an issue of it.

• Got it.--Earthh (talk) 18:47, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

• Other than that, the references seem properly formatted and reliable. You have my support on the third criteria.--Retrohead (talk) 18:33, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 15:21, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.