Jump to content

Talk:Froge.mp3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 talk 22:20, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

Moved to mainspace by Launchballer (talk). Self-nominated at 20:35, 14 June 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Froge.mp3; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: No - Appears to be cited in the article, but none is provided here.
  • Interesting: No - The hook appears to just be a lyric of one of the songs on this album, but no other details are given. I struggle to even call this a hook, as it's not providing a fact that could interest readers in the article.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: The article itself is fine, but this hook needs work. Grnrchst (talk) 07:46, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

QPQ done: Template:Did you know nominations/Killing of Mitch Henriquez. I would however suggest that ALT0 is extremely interesting; I used a very similar hook at On & on (piri & tommy song) and so far, it's the second-most successful non-image hook this month. Obviously others are available, like ALT1: ... that Froge.mp3 was derived from a nickname Piri & Tommy used to give each other?, but the original hook will get loads more clicks. Looking at this article now, I suspect Froge.tour may pass muster on its own merits, and so I need a little longer to decide whether to siphon it off.--Launchballer 09:08, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think if it were an article about the song itself, then I'd be more open to it. But as a hook for an article about the album, I don't think it's interesting, I just find it confusing. I don't think clicks out of confusion are the same as clicks out of interest. I would support ALT1 though, as that was a detail that stood out to me when I read the article. But I'm going to ask for another reviewer's opinion, as maybe this is just my personal quibbles. --Grnrchst (talk) 09:55, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note that Froge.tour has now been split. ALT1 is perfectly usable for Froge.mp3, but I additionally propose:
ALT2: ... that Piri & Tommy's Froge.tour included pole dancing?--Launchballer 12:43, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
QPQ done.--Launchballer 18:18, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Launchballer, is this nomination for the mix tape or the tour? I think you need to decide, and just pursue the one here, or if you want to do both, make a separate nomination for the tour and propose ALT2 there. It's important to note that each article needs 1500 prose characters that's independent of the other if you wish both articles to count. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:56, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Both articles are both well over that. This nomination is for the mixtape, I've spun off the tour to Froge.tour.--Launchballer 20:37, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've struck ALT2 on this page, since it isn't for the nominated article. I have also, agreeing with Grnrchst, struck the original hook as being inappropriate in Wikipedia's voice and, frankly, not nearly as interesting as Launchballer seems to think it is. (Quoting lyrics is generally not a good idea, and presenting lyrics without quotes is misleading at best.) ALT1 could use some work prior to final approval: there's no indication in the article that Piri & Tommy have entirely ceased using the nickname. Maybe even something as simple as replacing "used to give" with "gave" for this latter, though it was the name of the mixtape, not the mixtape itself, that derived from the nickname. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:40, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ALT3: ... that Froge.mp3 took its name from a nickname Piri & Tommy gave each other? Source: https://readdork.com/features/hype-list-2023-piri-and-tommy/ --Launchballer 21:51, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think that’s fine, but you’re missing out an opportunity to educate people about the band’s frog motif; for example, the source for that hook mentions a signature crochet frog. In the concert abuse article, an editor was genuinely confused by this motif (as I’m sure many others are as well) and even went so far as to remove it from that article because they didn’t understand it.[1]. So I see this as an opportunity to say a bit more about the frog motif, if you can. Might require adding more sources and content to do it. Viriditas (talk) 01:54, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Another hook idea is to mention that each song on the album represents a different stage in their relationship.[2] Viriditas (talk) 02:22, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My reading of that edit summary suggests a certain level of mistrust towards LeftLion as well (even though it's a twenty-year-old ex-print magazine, team of editors, blah blah blah). I need longer to do the actual work on this. However, I can tell you I point blank refuse to put the claim "Each song (in both lyrics and vibe) captures a different point in time of our journey, and the different experiences and emotions we were going through." as anything other than attributed opinion, because I don't believe it to be correct. I am actually quite a big fan of the band (well, her mainly), and I know for a fact that "can we" was written about a previous music manager (can't find a better source but almost certainly Chris Bellam) and "player 2" was written about Villiers' departure from a previous band (almost certainly Porij), which happened way more than a year after (he was still in the band in late 2021, having met her in August 2020). And that's before we get into Caviar Hardcore being released before he even met her. (See also this pre-mainspace revision.)--Launchballer 04:55, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You’re right, but I was just paraphrasing in the hopes that you would come up something similar. The quote from the source actually says, "'[froge.mp3] is basically a diary of the first year tommy and I have been making music, and pretty much the first year of us knowing each other at all,' shares piri. 'Each song (in both lyrics and vibe) captures a different point in time of our journey, and the different experiences and emotions we were going through." Viriditas (talk) 05:04, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's what I meant to copy, I just woke up.--Launchballer 05:07, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've done a little bit more work, may do some more. I fear that tour related stuff is rather within the purview of froge.tour. (Also, check out that editor removing the Piri & Tommy stuff again from the concert abuse article despite me rewording it and adding a separate source.)--Launchballer 12:16, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Launchballer: The other editor you are referring to is not being reasonable, so I would just ignore them for right now; I can help you address that particular problem after we are done with this DYK. Do you have any other hooks to offer or are you going with ALT3? Viriditas (talk) 20:59, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Launchballer: It looks like you did a major update. Is this in preparation for another hook or are you going with ALT3? Viriditas (talk) 09:58, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, ALT3 it is. It's a crying shame I can't find enough sourcing to say that "the first single from Piri & Tommy's Froge.mp3 was released before they had even heard of each other" though.--Launchballer 11:27, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I will wait until you finish adding the sources, because I can’t pass a DYK when the article has unsourced material. Viriditas (talk) 23:07, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, that was unclear. "Caviar Hardcore" is sourced, but to the work itself; for it to be a hook, it has to be secondary. There is unfortunately no secondary source that mentions it. I've also added a link to the playlist to the sentence ending "per froge.tv". There shouldn't be anything else uncited in there.--Launchballer 08:29, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Launchballer: You weren’t unclear, I was. Check the track listing section. Viriditas (talk) 08:41, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WP:TRACKLISTINGs don't need a source, and I think "Unless specified, all subjects are per froge.tv" covers the subjects.--Launchballer 08:52, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I’m aware. That’s not what I’m talking about, however. I’m talking about the subject descriptions in the track listing; you only cited half of them. Those do need refs. You don’t need the heading. Are you just trying to save time? Just add all the sources to froge.tv for the remainder. And that links to 12 different videos. So link to the correct one. In the future, you can add the links to transcription using one of the AI sites. Viriditas (talk) 08:59, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Added.--Launchballer 09:15, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I will do a final walk through and review now. One thing that keeps sticking out to me is the first line in section 1 (On 14 May 2020, Tommy Villiers released the song "Caviar Hardcore".) Is there anything else you can add to this to give it some continuity and flow? For example, I assume there is a small backstory to this? One additional sentence is all you need. It just reads strangely by itself. Viriditas (talk) 09:52, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There's probably more than you need, but I copied a bit from Tommy Villiers which helps contextualise it.--Launchballer 10:16, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Question: when you wrote "A slightly more lukewarm review, however, came from The Soundboard Stereo, who described the album as 'generally likable as background music'", do you think you might be editorializing a bit there about it being "lukewarm"? I admit, the review is highly critical, but in a good way, and you can tell they genuinely like the band but are holding them to a higher standard of expectations. So my personal opinion is that the review in question is not in fact lukewarm. However, I do wonder if some of this was a backhanded compliment, and I might be reading it too positively. Just something I was wondering about. The review does emphasize the live-nature of the act over and above the recording, but relegates the recording to background music. Do you think there might be another way to frame this other than lukewarm? Viriditas (talk) 10:29, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've expanded it, I think it's now a slightly fairer summary.--Launchballer 10:53, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Earwig's Copyvio Detector is giving me a return of 54.0%. Is this a false positive due to the quotes, or something else? Viriditas (talk) 10:58, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's a false positive because of the quotes.--Launchballer 11:01, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ALT3: ... that Froge.mp3 took its name from a nickname Piri & Tommy gave each other? Source: https://readdork.com/features/hype-list-2023-piri-and-tommy/ --Launchballer 11:12, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, everything checks out. Article is policy compliant; length ok, hook ok, QPQ ok. Good to go. You might want to move the hook down here, just above my comment, because it is buried in this review. Viriditas (talk) 11:08, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Launchballer: I just had a chance to look at this with fresh eyes. How do you feel about changing the hook to "…that Froge.mp3 took its title from a nickname Piri & Tommy gave each other? Or some other variation that gets rid of "name"? I propose this because reading "name" and "nickname" is kind of bland. Also I would rather know it was a mixtape, such as "…that the mixtape Froge.mp3", but I understand that shorter hooks are preferred. Also, I have another question, why does Piri prefer to call the album a mixtape? I noticed that she corrected Tommy when he called it an album. Is this a marketing or branding thing? Viriditas (talk) 00:06, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Name to title - good idea. ALT4 ... that the mixtape Froge.mp3 took its title from a nickname Piri & Tommy gave each other? As for the mixtape question, I can't find an RS for it, but given that she was still referring to it as an album in July 2022, I rather suspect it may not have been her choice.--Launchballer 00:35, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 00:39, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Froge.mp3&oldid=1179413780"