Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Rich Girl (Gwen Stefani song)

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 promoted 02:07, 1 June 2007.

[edit] Rich Girl (Gwen Stefani song)

Was at peer review for three weeks but didn't generate any comments. ShadowHalo 21:16, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

• Support looks okay; prose reasonably good, and well-referenced. Resurgent insurgent 12:33, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support with a couple of comments (sorry I missed the peer review!)

1. Not overly keen on "(see 2004 in music)" - is just pipe-wikilinking that to the 2004 preceding it such a bad thing?
2. "Dre had produced "Let Me Blow Ya Mind", and he had produced "Wicked Day" for her during her time with No Doubt, though the track excluded from the group's 2001 album Rock Steady." feels a bit clumsy - "..had produced.." twice, and I think it should also read "...thought the track was excluded...".

Otherwise, good work. The Rambling Man 13:40, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

• • WikiProject Music recommends putting the year in parentheses like that, I'm guessing because the target isn't intuitive otherwise. If you think that's a bad idea, I'll change it since the issue came up when What You Waiting For? went for FAC, and it might be a good idea to have another discussion at the project's talk page. I've reworded that part; it originally said "Stefani had worked with him", but I changed it last night since I found out the two didn't actually work together (they just sent him the track). It now reads "After Stefani had helped pen over twenty songs for her solo debut, she approached Dr. Dre, who had produced for her twice before.[4] Dre had produced 'Let Me Blow Ya Mind' as well as 'Wicked Day', a track that was excluded from No Doubt's 2001 album Rock Steady.[5]" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ShadowHalo (talk • contribs).
• Support (begrudgingly) - Despite the fact that I depise Gwen Stefani, and find it utterly reprehensible that storage space is wasted on a bastardization of a classic song... it's a well-written article. Well-written about garbage, but well-written nonetheless. So I will support it, and long for the day when the standards of this encyclopedia are raised so we can begin deleting crap like this. Anthony Hit me up... 16:46, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Very magnanimous indeed! ;-) The Rambling Man 17:13, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
• Comment. I think this article needs to write more about the lyrics like in Smells Like Teen Spirit#Lyrics and interpretation. --Maitch 17:58, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
  • I'll see if I can find more interpretation of the lyrics, though it's unlikely that there's much more out there. "Smells Like Teen Spirit" has some engaging lyrics, and there have been all sorts of sources published with interpretations of the song and its impact. "Rich Girl", as FutureNJGov pointed out, is a pretty ephemeral piece of pop, so most of the comments or interpretations are done in passing, through interviews, album reviews, etc., and don't go nearly as in depth. That, and the lyrics aren't nearly as deep (there's not too much to interpret with lines like "I'd have all the money in the world, if I was a wealthy girl"). ShadowHalo 20:56, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
    • I would agree, there's not too much lateral intepretation available here compared with Teen Spirit. Take the article on its merits, it's as good as it could ever be without becoming pompous and pretentious. The Rambling Man 21:03, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
      • I still feel that the article fails to answer the basic question of what the song is about. I agree that you can't write as much as Teen Spirit, but it should be possible to write something. --Maitch 10:08, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
        • That's already in the article; it just doesn't have a separate section. There's a summary in the Music and structure section (for example, "Stefani discusses dreams of wealth and luxury"), and there is some background information about the lyrics too ("even if you're poor and you have love, you're rich", references to Galliano and Westwood). Because the lyrics are so insipid, a separate section on lyrics would seem out of place, and the information is instead merged into the other sections. I did a check of the sources here and looked for more, but I can't find any more interpretation, so adding to what's there would just be original research. ShadowHalo 11:13, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
• Weak oppose—1a. Great article on the whole; however, there are lingering issues with the prose. Here are random examples:
  • "It was a commercial success, reaching number the top ten on the majority of the charts it entered, and topped the singles chart in Argentina." "Number" should be removed. "The majority" should be "most" for succinctness.
  • "After Stefani had helped pen over twenty songs for her solo debut," Plain English, please; change "pen" to "write" for our non-native speakers. "Over" should be "more than".
  • The sentence at the beginning of "Formats and track listing" seems superfluous.
  • "It worked its way to number four, staying on the chart for a total of fourteen days." Perhaps "It worked its way to number four, staying on the chart for two weeks"?
  • "Following Eve's rap, Stefani sings the chorus and closes the song with a coda, which like the introduction consists of repeating the word na." Two missing commas.
• Just needs some polishing. I would, but I'm on break in my business writing class. — Deckiller 23:32, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
  • I've made those changes except for the fourth. TRL was only aired four (maybe five, I think it changed at some point) days a week, so fourteen days doesn't have an exact equivalent in weeks. At least one or two of those issues came from some changes right before FAC, so I'll have another look at the article sometime today to see if there's some more copyediting to be done. ShadowHalo 23:42, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
• SupportAll i would like to say is that the article is very informative,the pictures are to the point and it is better than many of the articles which were made Featured before.This article goes into the depth of the song.As you read the article,you become more interested.The Critical Reception section is well put up and the section discussing the background of the song is worth reading 5 times.This article is surely one of the best works of Wikipedia.I have seen one thing,Gwen Stefani's solo career related articles are really good and i am proud that i am helping in their betterment.I Support the article. User: Luxurious.gaurav

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. 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.