Talk:Face to Face (Daft Punk song)/GA1

GA Review

Passed. Lazman321 (talk) 00:51, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: Reppop (talk · contribs) 20:28, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Lazman321 (talk · contribs) 20:16, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Discovery is my favorite EDM album. I'll gladly take this one next. Lazman321 (talk) 20:16, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1 - Well written

1a - Clear and concise prose

Reviewing... - I am going to go down the article, noting any issues with the prose I find down below. Lazman321 (talk) 06:19, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, finished. Lazman321 (talk) 19:37, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done all. [edit] As in, just this section. reppop^talk 21:19, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"It was released on their second studio album, Discovery, in 2001, before being released as a promotional single in 2003." to "It was released on their second studio album Discovery (2001) and as a promotional single in 2003."
"Two remixes by Cosmo Vitelli and Demon were made and included in the duo's 2003 remix album Daft Club." to "Two remixes by Cosmo Vitelli and Demon were made and included in Daft Punk's 2003 remix album Daft Club."
"The collaboration began when Daft Punk, inspired by Edwards' distinctive 'cut-up' production style, connected with him after previously attempting to collaborate on Homework." to "Daft Punk were inspired by Edwards' distinctive 'cut-up' production style and first successfully convinced him to collaborate with them after the release of Homework (1997)."
"...Daft Punk had met Todd Edwards before releasing their 1997 debut album, Homework." to "...Daft Punk met Todd Edwards prior to releasing their 1997 debut album, Homework."
"..with Bangalter aligning the samples to the same key." to "...with Bangalter adjusting the samples to the same key."
Link key
"They laid down a drum loop, with Edwards and Bangalter playing the samples while Homem-Christo provided verbal input." to "Edwards and Bangalter played the samples over a set drum loop while Homem-Christo provided verbal input."
"According to Bangalter, the preceding track 'Short Circuit' symbolized shutdown, followed by a moment of awakening to face reality." to "According to Bangalter, the preceding track 'Short Circuit' symbolized shutdown, with 'Face to Face' symbolizing awakening thereafter to face reality."
"...ranked the song as the fourth greatest moment from the duo out of ten." to "...ranked the song as the fourth greatest moment from the duo."
"John Bush of AllMusic described 'Face to Face' as '[twisting] his trademarked split-second samples...'" to "John Bush of AllMusic described 'Face to Face' as '[twisting Edwards'] trademarked split-second samples...'"
Link Shannon
"...was unaware that the single reached number one, due to a strained relationship..." to "...was unaware that the single reached number one due to a strained relationship..."
"...while the Demon remix was likened to a..." to "...and likening the Demon remix to a..."

1b - Adherence to the Manual of Style

Good articles require five specific guidelines of the WP:MOS to be met: MOS:LEAD, MOS:LAYOUT, MOS:WTW, MOS:FICTION, and MOS:LIST.

MOS:LEAD - I think the lead needs revamped. It feels disorganized and it mentions some details not in the body such as Daft Punk being inspired by Edwards' "cut-up" style while neglecting some details that should be in the lead such as the sample-hunting search in the 2020s.
MOS:LAYOUT - The order of article elements are in line. I would suggest, however, merging the commercial performance and remix sections into the release section in order to minimize single paragraph sections.
MOS:WTW - Anything covered by this guideline I likely already addressed under criterion 1a.
MOS:FICTION - The only section covered by this guideline, the music video section, already follows it fine.
MOS:LIST - The four appendix sections (track listing, personnel, charts, and see also) that rely on lists already follow precedent with other song articles. They're fine as is.

Please focus on addressing MOS:LEAD and MOS:LAYOUT for this criterion. Lazman321 (talk) 20:11, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did the things outlined in the LAYOUT portion, will take some time to do the LEAD portion. reppop^talk 22:07, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Lazman321: What specific things would you want in the lead? Asking so that I can try do revamp it with a specific focus. reppop^talk 00:57, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Reppop: I would suggest the following: combine the paragraphs into one, swap the positions of the music video sentence and the background sentence, expand on the background aspect slightly, and include a mention of the sample hunt at the end. Any additional cleanup as necessary is fine. Lazman321 (talk) 01:21, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

would this be good?

"Face to Face" is a single by French electronic music duo Daft Punk, featuring vocals and co-production by American house music producer Todd Edwards. It was released on their second studio album Discovery (2001) and as a promotional single in 2003. As part of Discovery, the song appears in the film Interstella 5555: The 5tory of the 5ecret 5tar 5ystem, and the section of the film in which the song appears serves as its music video. The track uses Edwards' distinctive "cut-up" production style, incorporating over 20 uncredited samples from various soft rock and folk music songs. Daft Punk first successfully convinced Edwards to collaborate with them after the release of Homework (1997), meeting for two studio sessions to record and build the track. The song achieved commercial success, reaching the number one spot on the Billboard Hot Dance Club Play chart in 2004. Two remixes by Cosmo Vitelli and Demon were made and included in Daft Punk's 2003 remix album Daft Club. Most of the samples remained unknown, being a subject of a search that continued until 2023, when fans used AI tools to uncover the remaining unknown samples.

reppop^talk 05:24, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Reppop: Yes, that would be fine. Lazman321 (talk) 15:40, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Replaced. reppop^talk 16:02, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2 - Verifiable with no original research

2a - Identifiable list of references

This article does ✓ Pass this criterion. Lazman321 (talk) 04:17, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2b - Reliable sources

Is The Emory Wheel reliable for this topic? Its not a professional music publication but rather a student newspaper, and it's hard to check the author's credentials considering he shares the name of a legal scholar that is very obviously not the author despite what MuckRack might claim. WP:RSSM might be worth consulting here. Lazman321 (talk) 04:31, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, don't think Jeffrey Rosen is actually a legal scholar since it's a student newspaper. If it warrants removal, I can do so, as I don't think I would be losing much as I also put two other reviews of the song. reppop^talk 20:21, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I would suggest removing the review and perhaps finding a more suitable retrospective commentary. Lazman321 (talk) 20:13, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've decided to remove it and not replace it with anything, the only other retrospective I could currently find is another student newspaper. reppop^talk 21:32, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2c - No original research

Reviewing... - source check here. Lazman321 (talk) 04:45, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And now I'm finished with the source check. Most of the sources check out, and the sources that didn't, much of the information could be found in other sources. Lazman321 (talk) 05:04, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed there's an unsourced paragraph in the article about a remix by Todd Edwards. Please either add sources or remove the paragraph. Lazman321 (talk) 05:39, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Removed. Just undid the edit that added it. reppop^talk 19:40, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2d - No copyright violations

During my source check, I didn't really notice any plagiarism. There's no close paraphrasing really nor are the quotes that excessive. This article does ✓ Pass this criterion. Lazman321 (talk) 05:17, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

3 - Broad in its coverage

3a - Main aspects

From what I can tell based on the sources, this article does address the main points of this topic. While I wish there was more information on the reception of this song, I understand that addressing such a request might be unreasonable given the song was only released individual as a promotional single. As such, this article does ✓ Pass this criterion. Lazman321 (talk) 05:48, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

3b - Focused

The last sentence of the samples section is unnecessary. The section already gives a fairly detailed overview of the samples and the efforts of the sample hunting Discord community in tracking them. The last sentence makes the paragraph seem unwieldy and isn't even entirely supported by the source. If you would like to provide readers a convenient list of all the samples, perhaps consider including "Face to Face"'s entry on WhoSampled in an external links section. Lazman321 (talk) 05:31, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could I rewrite it to say "The track also includes samples by Dave Mason, Firefall, Dan Fogelberg and Tim Weisberg, and Steppenwolf", or would you just like it removed? All the artists here are mentioned in the Rolling Stone Italia article except for Deborah Washington. reppop^talk 19:48, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest just removing it. Like I said, the section already provides a good overview as is. Having that additional sentence is unnecessary for understanding the subject and might even make it seem more confusing to a broad audience. Lazman321 (talk) 20:17, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Added WhoSampled page in the external links and removed the sentence. reppop^talk 21:03, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

4 - Neutral

All the opinions were properly attributed, and at no point did the article feel promotional. This article does ✓ Pass this criterion. Lazman321 (talk) 19:43, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

5 - Stable

There has not been a single edit since August 7. This article does ✓ Pass this criterion. Lazman321 (talk) 05:37, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

6 - Illustrated by media

6a - Copyright tags

All the images have valid copyright tags, with one having a valid fair-use rationale and the other two having valid free-use tags. This article does ✓ Pass this criterion. Lazman321 (talk) 05:44, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

6b - Relevant media

All the images, which includes two cover arts and a picture of the featured artist, are relevant to the song. This article does ✓ Pass this criterion. Lazman321 (talk) 05:45, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

7 - Verdict

@Reppop: Thank you for your patience. I am finished with the review and will now place it On hold for seven days or until my points have been addressed. Lazman321 (talk) 20:18, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Reppop: I have been away from Wikipedia due to IRL obligations past the timespan I set the review to be on hold for, delaying the review. For that I deeply apologize. It appears you have addressed my concerns, as as such, I will set this review as

Passed. Lazman321 (talk) 00:50, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.