This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dua Lipa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Dua Lipa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Dua LipaWikipedia:WikiProject Dua LipaTemplate:WikiProject Dua LipaDua Lipa articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electronic music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Electronic music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Electronic musicWikipedia:WikiProject Electronic musicTemplate:WikiProject Electronic musicelectronic music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to
pop music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Fever (Dua Lipa and Angèle song) is part of the WikiProject Albania, an attempt to co-ordinate articles relating to Albania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the
welcome page so as to become familiar with the guidelines. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our
open tasks.AlbaniaWikipedia:WikiProject AlbaniaTemplate:WikiProject AlbaniaAlbania articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Women in music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music articles
We may have to refer to these for descriptions of what the articles wrote. Even though this is an unreliable source, since Lipa herself called it out, it is important to include their false reports.
LOVI3314:44, 26 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Requested move 30 October 2020
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
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.
Angèle - a featured artist?
Hello all! I am wondering if Angèle is a featured artist or not. User
Alexismata7 has already changed her to a lead artist, but I am still uncertain.
Lipa mentioned
twice, and
Warner Music UK referred to her as a featured artist, plus the cover art released (shown in infobox) mentions her as a featured artist. Many sources have also mentioned that she is a featured artist:
She is additionally credited as a featured artist on all charting websites. Some Examples:
Australia,
France,
Belgium
Many sources have also referred to it as a collaboration with Angèle, which doesn't necessarily mean she is a lead artist, I just thought it is worth mentioning:
Hi @
LOVI33: I think the sources you cite could be influenced by the artwork which says the song is a featuring with Angèle. I think the final answer is given by the streaming platforms. Per
MOS:TITLE we had to wait until this date today to know the accreditation of the official release. This is a case similar to the
request move of "Rain on Me".
Alexismata7 (
talk)
16:44, 30 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Alexismata7, I am not disagreeing with you, but I just think its weird how the promotion buildup (Social media post's by Lipa and Warner Music, plus the cover art) credited Angèle as a featured artist, but credited her as a lead artists on digital download and streaming platforms. I have reviewed the "Rain on Me" requested move, and It was requested before the song was released. As far as I'm aware, Ariana Grande was never credited as a featured artist like Angèle was so I think we definitely need to establish a consensus before moving the page.
LOVI3317:20, 30 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Before I saw the cover art I was more inclined to say she was a co-lead artist but the cover art says “featuring” on it so I honestly don’t know what to think. If the cover art just had the two artists’ names on it, then I’d be more inclined to say co-lead since that’s what the streaming services say. But since the cover art says featured, and so do multiple sources, this is made more complicated. Unlike Rain on Me, which to my knowledge was billed as Gaga and Grande almost everywhere, this appears to be a more difficult issue to solve.
CAMERAwMUSTACHE (
talk)
13:41, 31 October 2020 (UTC)reply
@
CAMERAwMUSTACHE:@
LOVI33: Particularly the artwork
was revealed days before the release, indicating that the song would be a featuring. When the release day arrived, the accreditation was changed, I think we should be guided by the official credits that musical platforms provide, beyond what media like Billboard, NME, Vulture and Consequence of Sound can interpret about whether it is a duet or a featuring.
Alexismata7 (
talk)
15:25, 31 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Lil-unique1 makes a good point. Maybe we should wait to see how the Official Charts Company and Billboard credit Angèle on chart positions, assuming the song charts in the United States and United Kingdom. As I mentioned above, chart tracking websites such as australian-charts.com mention her as a featured artist.
LOVI3301:13, 1 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Also Universal Music Publishing say on their
homepage "feat. Angele" but "& Angele" on the
single page. Just to add to the confusion. Having said that, Dua is signed to Warner and Warner are releasing the single. ≫
Lil-Unique1-{
Talk }-01:56, 1 November 2020 (UTC)reply
I think they were initially going to make Angèle a featured artist prior to the release, but decided to change it after. Might explain why secondary sources all say Angèle due to press releases, while the streaming services all seem to suggest she is a lead artist. I would support the name change, but I also have a similar problem over at
Talk:Lemonade (Internet Money and Gunna song), so I would be interested to see what you guys think about my move request for that article too.
Nahnah4 (
talk |
contribs)
17:05, 1 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Per
this interview with Dua and Angele, which is supported by the record label, it's clearly Dua Lipa's song. She says she wrote it and sent it to Angele. The cover art pops up, so does a caption saying "Dua Lipa feat. Angele" and then also the record label is listed as Warner which is Dua's record label. The interview is from the 30th. ≫
Lil-Unique1-{
Talk }-16:30, 2 November 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Lil-unique1: I didn't see any record label coverage in the interview. The video is an exclusive from Konbini, a source that in the video credited the song as featuring, said source has no relationship with Warner Records, it is another unofficial source that interprets that Angèle is a featured artist. Having a definitive position is difficult because the official credits say one thing but the interview invites us to interpret the case in another way.
Alexismata7 (
talk)
17:08, 2 November 2020 (UTC)reply
I'm fairly certain if the label / Dua's manager weren't happy with the interview they would not have allowed it to present in that way. The record labels provide the info to the charts which already list "featured" as does the single cover. It might be worth waiting for Billboard or a direct label source. ≫
Lil-Unique1-{
Talk }-17:18, 2 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Right now I don't really have an opinion yet, I'm probably going to wait for more info such as chart positions, but the interview
Lil-unique1 provided makes a good point. Warner Records is clearly attempting to push this song as a feature. Here are some examples from
Warner Records UK and
Warner Music UK that support this, but I think we can all agree that Dua is the main artist, even if Angèle is also a lead.
LOVI3318:41, 2 November 2020 (UTC)reply
I find some content of this article says it is the first English song of Angèle. But Angèle's earlier work "La Loi de Murphy" also has many English lyriclyrics… But both of them have many French lyrics, which is apparently different from English. So,how do we define the word, English song? Or maybe we should use other words to replace it.--
波斯波莉斯 (
talk)
06:02, 18 November 2020 (UTC)reply
It's indeed not her first English-language song, "La Loi de Murphy" and "Flemme" from 2017 have also lyrics in English sung by Angèle. In fact, she doesn't even sing in English on "Fever" (except a small part of the chorus). It might be sourced, but "Fever" being her first English-language song remains incorrect. I rather think it should be described as "Angèle's first participation on an English/foreign/international song".
Romain Rousseau (
talk)
22:23, 6 December 2020 (UTC)reply
I have opened this review for a second opinion as it doesn't seem the user who offered to complete this review will get it done. Any comments would be amazing. Thanks!
LOVI3312:47, 30 April 2021 (UTC)reply
This is not the way to do it as the original reviwer will get the credit for someone else. I will let
BlueMoonset know so he can removed the review which was opened, without loosing its order in the queue. I'm not sure how to do it, henceforh I won't.
MarioSoulTruthFan (
talk)
12:24, 1 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the
Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed
Being that this article has been in the queue for over two months, it must relieving to see it getting taken on for review... for anyone who sees that this is GA2, that is inaccurate since the first one was supposed to be closed but nobody ever got round to it. --
K. Peake07:29, 28 June 2021 (UTC)reply
Infobox and lead
Shouldn't the languages be separated using bullet points instead in the infobox?
Add a sentence directly after the above one mentioning that it was supposed to be included on the original version of the album, though Lipa decided the beat did not have a suitable sound, or something similar
"It was released for" → "The song was released for"
Audio sample looks mostly good, but maybe mention on the text what part of the song it demonstrates? A source is not required for this info, as it is basically implied.
""Fever" is a" → "Musically, "Fever" is a"
Are you sure there should be a comma before with in the second sentence?
"while it adds an additional D chord to" → "while an additional D chord is added to"
"that includes hand claps and snap sounds." → "that contains hand claps and a snap sound."
"synths while it as a whole features airy instrumentals" → "synths, while it as a whole features airy instrumentation"
"and French with their" → "and French, with their"
"Lipa begins the song and" → "She begins the song and"
"sing together following that." → "sing together afterwards."
"and what comes with" → "as well as what comes with"
"playful," while Angèle is "softer, pleading, almost despondent."" → "playful", while Angèle is "softer, pleading, almost despondent"." per
MOS:QUOTE
Done
Release and promotion
Remove wikilinks on music video and London
"on social media" → "via social media"
"that their collaboration would be called" → "that the collaboration would be titled" but the title being revealed and the October 24 date are not backed up
"especially on the hook, and called" → "particularly on the hook, also calling"
"a "satisfying assist."" → "a "satisfying assist"."
"praised its beat calling it "fleet" and "efficient," and stating it" → "praised the beat, which they called "fleet" and "efficient", as well as stating it"
"They additionally praised" → "The staff additionally praised"
Pop should be piped to
Pop music for the Euphoria Magazine review instead
"dance pop tune,"" → "dance pop tune","
Change Consequence of Sound to Consequence with the pipe
"infections pop song,"" → "infectio[us] pop song"," because that is probably what the reviewer actually meant despite the grammar
Uproxx should not be italicised
"thumping pop tune."" → "thumping pop tune"."
"on its 2020 best songs of 2020 list," → "on its list of the year's best songs,"
Done
Commercial performance
"received 14,000,000 streams" → "received 14,400,000 streams" per the source
"peak of 69," → "peak of number 69,"
The two weeks part is not backed up for the UK and Canada charts, so reword to how it reached the position on both of the charts instead
For the UK, if you press the plus symbol next to the song position, it backs up that it up. For Canada, it says that it spent two weeks on the chart and it didn't enter the chart following that week. Unfortunately, the song doesn't appear on Lipa's archive page so this is the only way it can be backed up. Also, what do you mean by "how it reached the position"? Do you mean like "It debuted at number ... and reached a peak of ..."?
You can keep the two weeks part, but change the end of the sentence to "peaking at number 79 on both charts" since the countries themselves aren't mentioned by name in this sentence. --
K. Peake07:18, 1 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the review
Kyle Peake! I had to finish the improvements fast as I am probably going to be inactive on Wikipedia for the next few days. Let me know if any more improvements need to be made.
LOVI3304:47, 1 July 2021 (UTC)reply
LOVI33 Very slick response and I'll tell you this now while you are still awaiting potential comments; I left one improvement still pending for commercial performance and you need to change ref 52's date to using 2020 instead of 2021. --
K. Peake07:18, 1 July 2021 (UTC)reply
For anyone confused as to why only the second GA review is in the history on this talk page, it is because the first review was closed due to the nominator abandoning it but deletion was never followed through with. --
K. Peake20:50, 1 July 2021 (UTC)reply