Revision as of 19:53, 29 June 2024 edit Aoba47 (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers 91,400 edits →‎Aoba47: Reply Tag: Reply ← Previous edit		Revision as of 17:58, 30 June 2024 edit undo Relayed (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 1,771 edits Addressed some comments; will address the rest soon Next edit →
Line 22: * I think the lead's first two sentences can be combined to be, '''''Pagtatag!''''' (stylized in [[All caps\|all uppercase]]; <abbr>transl.</abbr> strengthening) is the second [[extended play]] (EP) by the Filipino boy band [[SB19]], released by [[Sony Music Philippines]] on June 9, 2023. : Merged I would reword this part, (The EP experimented with different genres), as an EP as an object cannot actually experiment. : Reworded For this listing, (with [[Pop music\|pop]], [[Hip hop music\|hip hop]], [[Electronic dance music\|EDM]], [[Soul music\|soul]], [[Rhythm and blues\|R&B]], [[Sentimental ballad\|ballad]], and [[Acoustic music\|acoustic]] elements), the sentence seems to be about genres. However, neither [[Sentimental ballad\|ballad]] and [[Acoustic music\|acoustic]] are types of music, not genres so they do not really fit in this context. : Reworded and removed types If this EP has all these genres, why is only pop included in the infobox? If critics described the overall EP as pop, this should be clarified. Right now, there just seems to be a contradiction between the lead and the infobox. : Reworded lead: Critics classify three of the songs from the EP so I went for the majority; hopefully the lead has been clarified. I would remove "with an ensemble consisting of" from the lead to just say the EP was produced by these people. : Removed This is likely a matter of personal preference, but I would avoid using "the boy band" as a way to not repeat the group's name. I first noticed this at the start of the lead's second paragraph, and I find that it reads awkwardly. [[Wikipedia:The problem with elegant variation\|This]] is a good essay about it. I know others feel differently about it, but I find that it can be distracting or unhelpful. : Reworded lead, I'll do this in later sections soon Why is this link, [[Where You At Tour\|WYAT (Where You At) Tour]], using a redirect instead of going directly to the article? : Relinked: Sorry, I recently moved the article to another title and forgot to change the redirects I do not think this part is needed, (The EP is centered on artistic themes of "identity strengthening"), as a later sentence already goes into topics discussed on the EP in a clearer way. : Most sources mentions the "identity" part so I figured it should stay; however, I reworded that part a bit I am not entirely sure what this part means, (and serves as the second installment in the band's ongoing [[Trilogy\|music trilogy]]). If they are doing a trilogy of EPs, that should be made clearer as "music trilogy" is not the best wording. : Reworded The "Critical reception" section would need to be rewritten. It does not support the overview provided in the lead and comes off more as a list of critics and quotes. [[Wikipedia:Copyediting reception sections\|WP:RECEPTION]] is a great resource to help with this. * I would incorporate the "Year-end lists" subsection into the overall "Critical reception" section and remove the table. Two listings are not enough to justify the table or the separate subsection. : Merged Why not replace [[:File:SB19 Get in The Zone Nationwide Concert in Negros 1 (cropped).jpg]] with an image of [[Pablo (musician)\|Pablo]] since he seems to the focus of the caption? That and there are already two images of group in the article so it is a bit repetitive. : Replaced photo [[:File:SB19 - Gento.ogg]] needs a stronger justification to be included here. The caption is just about the song. Audio samples for things like albums or EPs should be about how it is representative of the entire project as a whole. *: Thanks for the recommendation, I do kind of agree that "Gento" has less justification. I might use "I Want You" and "Ilaw" as samples since the former was their first R&B song and the latter may highlight the good "imperfections" that critics were referring to; I'll upload them soon. I have made some edits to the article ([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pagtatag%21&diff=1231652407&oldid=1231608394 here]). Feel free to revert anything you disagree with. My review so far is mostly about the lead, with some comments on other sections. My biggest concern is that the "Critical reception" section needs to be rewritten. Let me know if you have any questions. Also, more for future consideration, I would consider writing a shorter nomination statement as multiple paragraphs like this is not the norm. [[User:Aoba47\|Aoba47]] ([[User talk:Aoba47\|talk]]) 13:51, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Pagtatag!/archive1: Difference between revisions