Every Night (Hannah Diamond song) is currently a Songs good article nominee. Nominated by Skyshiftertalk at 13:02, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
Any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article may review it according to the good article criteria to decide whether or not to list it as a good article. To start the review process, click start review and save the page. (See here for the good article instructions.)
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 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
A fact from Every Night (Hannah Diamond song) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 24 November 2024 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that "Every Night", released ten years ago today, was called "the smartest dumb music out there"?
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.
Overall: Great hook! Might be a good candidate for the last/quirky hook. Article is well-sourced with online references; I verified the claim in the hook. Prose is neutral and well-worded; Earwig shows no copyvio. If I had to offer a minor critique, there's a bit of redundancy in the first paragraph of the Composition section: described is used twice in a row, then compared three times, and said two times after that, to attribute critic opinions. Perhaps the word choice could be varied a bit (eg using "called it", "labeled it", or "noted its production was similar to"). Nonetheless, the article is certainly DYK level already even without those edits! Frostly (talk) 07:15, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great hook! Might be a good candidate for the last/quirky hook. Article is well-sourced with online references; I verified the claim in the hook. Prose is neutral and well-worded; Earwig shows no copyvio. If I had to offer a minor critique, there's a bit of redundancy in the first paragraph of the Composition section: