Talk:Obsessed (Olivia Rodrigo song)

Did you know nomination

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 Launchballer talk 15:06, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that when Olivia Rodrigo spilled her guts, her obsession came out? Source: Variety
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Eriopis connexa, Template:Did you know nominations/Eurovision Song Contest 1994
  • Comment: Quirky hook referring to "Obsessed" being announced as Rodrigo's next single alongside the release of the album Guts (Spilled). Is our April Fool's set full yet? lol

Converted from a redirect by MaranoFan (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 66 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

NØ 13:56, 25 March 2024 (UTC).

• Not a review, and I do my QPQs oldest first so would not get to this one any time soon; the current hook has two adjacent links, and so cannot run per WP:DYKMOS. Assuming the hook checks out, I'd lean removing them both.--Launchballer 12:38, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

That should have said 'lean towards', but I'm happy with the changes made. Full review needed.--Launchballer 19:38, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

• Query: Article is new enough (content was added from 5 days before nomination, the article title previously serving as a redirect page), long enough, neutral with regard to its sources (mainly industry publications) and no copyvio detected. Article has some short sections but is presentable with no BLP issues. A quick read through the linked articles revealed no obvious problems. Hook is of good length, formatted, cited, and interesting. The second QPQ checks out. Problem is that the first QPQ has already been used by the nominator for Template:Did you know nominations/Been Like This which is on the approved page. Another QPQ is required. – Reidgreg (talk) 05:24, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
• I decided to work on two alts:
  • ALT1: ... that when she spilled her guts, Olivia Rodrigo's obsession came out? source: as above
  • ALT2: ... that obsessed, Olivia Rodrigo spilled her guts? source: as above

These are pretty simple modifications of ALT0, using the original linking to play on Guts (Spilled) (the album version). The first rearranges a bit to avoid adjacent links and is longer, while the second has adjacent links and an unmodified song title and is much shorter. – Reidgreg (talk) 05:24, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

If you read the whole conversation on the "Been Like This" nomination, you would realize that the reviewer notes I only needed three articles for QPQ there, whereas I have provided four. So QPQ is fine. Thank you very much.--NØ 06:24, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

A little difficult to follow with unsigned comments. I struck the fourth QPQ from that nomination to be clear. QPQ good. – Reidgreg (talk) 12:22, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Approved for special occasion for 1 April. – Reidgreg (talk) 12:22, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Obsessed (Olivia Rodrigo song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: MaranoFan (talk · contribs) 00:38, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Dxneo (talk · contribs) 04:08, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello Thank you for this submission. I will be reviewing this in the next couple of days although I have exams coming up, but I'll take my chances. Let's have fun!

I look forward to it.--NØ 16:17, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Key÷

  Queries and suggestions
  Quoting from the article

Comments:

Prose:

Lead + quick facts

Background

• They wrote over 100 songs. Cross checking with this source, isn't that a figure of speech? If yes, why does it read like they literally wrote over 100 songs for the album?

• Looking at the same source, I think it seems to discuss it as a literal figure and not hyperbole. "For Guts, they wrote more than 100 songs - a figure that 'sounds way more impressive than it actually is'" is the quote, which seems to indicate the number actually exceeded 100, at least according to my interpretation. The figure of speech version would probably go "100s of songs".--NØ 05:32, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Cool dxneo (talk) 06:15, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Composition

Critical reception

Commercial performance

• "Elsewhere" is a redundant term. I've seen it flagged multiple times while patrolling PR.

• Removed.--NØ 05:32, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Music video

• Fascinating stuff. A screenshot from the music video wouldn't hurt.

• I feel like people would argue a screenshot doesn't meet the non-free criteria as it would be replaceable with a free picture of a beauty pageant, although actually including a picture of a random beauty pageant would look absurd.--NØ 05:32, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

True. This is GA and a non-free screenshot is the first thing you notice on this piece. Maybe we might find an image related to the video somewhere. Come to think of it, that is the only standalone article of a music video I've ever seen around here. dxneo (talk) 06:15, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

---

References

• Clean! No red source detected. I like how they did not leave out the subscription tag on this source.

---

OR

---

Plagiarism

Violation unlikely. Earwig finds 15.3% of similarities from an OCC which is one or two quotes.

---

Broad in its coverage

---

Neutral

---

Stable

• Last edited almost two weeks ago.

---

Media files

• 10% of 2:50 = 17 seconds. The audio file 18 seconds, I believe this happened due to rounding off.

• That is correct. If the file is downloaded offline, it's the permissible 17 second duration.--NØ 05:32, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

• Non-free cover art is fine and the background and promotion image is also fine and well captioned.

---

Verdict

• Definitely GA material, just waiting for the nominator to address the above mentioned issues. dxneo (talk) 02:54, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

• I would like to thank the reviewer and I have addressed the issues.--NØ 05:32, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

  Alright, not gonna waste my time on changing the icons. I'm passing this Thank you. dxneo (talk) 06:16, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.