Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/I Can Only Imagine (MercyMe song)/archive1
- 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 archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 13 April 2020 [1].
- Nominator(s): Toa Nidhiki05 00:22, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
I'm nominating this article for featured article because I think it's finally ready for review. I've been working on this on-and-off for years and was content with it at GA status, but a movie about the song was released in 2018 and that helped flesh out a lot of elements that had been unclear before, and the promotion of Almost There to FA helped give it a push. For those unfamiliar, this is the best-selling and most-played contemporary Christian song of all time and the signature song of the band MercyMe, one of the most successful Christian bands of all time. Oddly enough, it's had three distinct chart runs since its release in 2001: in 2001-02 it was on Christian radio, peaking at #1 on the Christian charts, then it crossed over to mainstream radio in 2003-04, becoming a big hit on AC stations, and finally, in 2018, it re-entered again, peaking at #1 on the Billboard Christian Songs chart and #10 on the Digital Songs chart. Along the way it has briefly charted in France, been adapted into a film that was the highest-grossing independent movie of 2018, and has been covered by other artists, with several versions charting on their own. It's an unusually long-lasting song and I think it would be a really excellent and unique addition to our FAs. Toa Nidhiki05 00:22, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
Support from John M Wolfson
[edit]the band's independent album
should perhaps be linked to the article independent music to clarify it; as such, per WP:DUPLINKS, the link in the body should thus be removed.it would be like to be before God in heaven
should be "in front of" to avoid confusion with the temporal sense of that word.with just a piano before building to include
perhaps the "just" should be removed, though I'll see how other reviewers respond to it.- My justification here is to clarify that the song begins with only piano and vocals. Saying just "piano and vocals" might imply there are other instruments there; the "just" is to clarify that the song opens only with them. Toa Nidhiki05 00:03, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
- Chart positions should be written as "number one", "number 71", etc., per MOS:NUMBER, rather than "No. 71", if I'm not mistaken.
- The second linked instance of 33rd GMA Dove Awards should be removed per DUPLINKS.
That's all for now. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 05:56, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
NOTE: I must mention that I intend to claim WikiCup points for this review. Thanks! – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 05:58, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
- Independent dates, such as October 12, 2001, are followed by a comma per the MOS (unless followed by other punctuation) even when one is not otherwise warranted.
- This should be fixed now. Toa Nidhiki05 14:17, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
- There should be more citations in the second paragraph of the "Background and recording" section; while it's not a dealbreaker as it currently is, it'd be better to have such citations.
- I added an additional citation in one of the more lengthy sections. To my recollection, longer sections drawn from the same source don’t require multiple citations unless there’s a direct quote, however. Toa Nidhiki05 14:17, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
- It is standard practice in FAs, although by no means mandatory, for a citation to follow every sentence.
- I added an additional citation in one of the more lengthy sections. To my recollection, longer sections drawn from the same source don’t require multiple citations unless there’s a direct quote, however. Toa Nidhiki05 14:17, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
That's all I can think of, otherwise I'd be inclined to support. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 00:41, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
- I’ve addressed both of these now, I think, John M WolfsonToa Nidhiki05 14:17, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
- Looks good, support. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 17:13, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
- I’ve addressed both of these now, I think, John M WolfsonToa Nidhiki05 14:17, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
Support Comments from Aoba47
[edit]Addressed comments
|
---|
I hope that my comments are helpful. Apologies for the length of the review, as I am just trying to be thorough and help as much as possible. You have done an excellent job with the article. Let me know if you need any clarification about anything. Hope you have a great rest of your day and/or night! Aoba47 (talk) 21:02, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
|
- I would recommend adding alternative text to the infobox image and for all of the other images in the article. Aoba47 (talk) 02:01, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
- All images should have alt text now. Toa Nidhiki05 03:25, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
- It seems like the ALT text has been removed. I will leave this point up to the editor who conducts the image review. Aoba47 (talk) 03:58, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for addressing everything. I will look through the article again tomorrow. Aoba47 (talk) 02:01, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you for your patience with the review. I support this for promotion based on the prose. If you have the time, I would greatly appreciate any feedback for my current FAC. Otherwise, I hope you have a great rest of your week! Aoba47 (talk) 04:02, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
Image review
- Suggest adding alt text
- Alts have been restored. Toa Nidhiki05 15:07, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
- Captions that aren't complete sentences shouldn't end in periods
- Fixed the one image that had that issue. Toa Nidhiki05 15:07, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
- File:Imagine_Bart_Millard.PNG needs a stronger FUR. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:59, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
- I’ve strengthened the FUR. Let me know what you think now, Nikkimaria. Toa Nidhiki05 15:07, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
- Better. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:35, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
Comments from Mike Christie
[edit]I'd like to see the first paragraph of the "Critical reception" section improved per the advice at WP:RECEPTION. Currently it's just a list of opinions -- see the "A said B" problem discussion in WP:RECEPTION, which makes for dull reading. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:13, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
- I've made some minor adjustments here, Mike Christie to make it more interesting. Let me know what you think of it now. Toa Nidhiki05 19:04, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- That's a slight improvement, but the first paragraph still reads like a list of opinions, rather than a natural overall description of the reviews. For example, three separate comments specifically praise the lyrics; wouldn't it be more natural to put those together, quoting or citing them? Similarly, two comments say the song was the highlight of the album; you simply repeat that point in different parts of the paragraph as if they were unrelated points. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:46, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
Coord note
[edit]Hi, this review has attracted no commentary for over a month; I've deliberately left it alone for longer than I normally would realising that many of us have other things on our minds at this time but it can't stay open indefinitely. Also it sounds like more work on the Reception section should take place before further review. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:46, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
- Closing note: This candidate has been archived, 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) 05:47, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.