Jump to content

Talk:Fumble (song)

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 Bruxton (talk01:42, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Created by Launchballer (talk). Self-nominated at 10:50, 1 July 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Fumble (song); 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 - I don't see the ref as calling him a "boyfriend," and with the sensitivity to words like that today, would suggest we change the phrase or put in a supporting RS ref.
  • Interesting: No - Interesting if we delete the word "breakup" from the hook
QPQ: Done.

Overall: I think the hook would be shorter and better if we were to delete the word "breakup." 2603:7000:2101:AA00:71BF:46EA:CE27:4F87 (talk) 07:07, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've replaced the reference, and added one for the fact that they were dating, but I do think the hook is more interesting with the word "breakup" in it, as it implies that the song was about the breakup. I'll do my QPQ in the morning.--Launchballer 22:58, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
a) But this is a hook - it's less hooky if you tell the reader "this was a breakup song, let me tell you who she was breaking up with, it was her boyfriend." That's not as hooky ("short, punchy, catchy, and likely to draw the readers in to wanting to read the article."). But "The song was called Fumble, it was a breakup song" is hookier. Plus, it's redundant to say it twice. b) my question is whether he is identified as a "boyfriend" in any ref you provide - not whether they were dating .. people all around me are changing their pronouns these days. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:29BE:6F6A:817E:D32E (talk) 23:42, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I added my QPQ above. ALT2: ... that Piri released the breakup song Fumble after her relationship ended?--Launchballer 11:32, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
QPQ is good, so I've now altered above rating in that regard. Similarly, the ref problem has been addressed (I couldn't see anything at ref 7, which has now been replaced), so I've reflected that. My comments on some of the hooks are noted. Up to the promotor to decide. I would propose for consideration ...
ALT3: ... that Piri released the song Fumble after her relationship ended? 2603:7000:2101:AA00:A994:4D0E:ED90:4ED3 (talk) 20:33, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Launchballer: how so you feel about the hook suggested ALT3? Bruxton (talk) 19:12, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I can see 2603's point but for me the interest would be in 'oh, they split up, let's see what she's got to say for herself'. I'm not opposed strongly enough to object to it running though, and I would also leave it to the promotor.--Launchballer 20:10, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]