# Talk:Honey Revenge

@Launchballer another one here you might be interested in helping me with :)) George (talk) 21:10, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. I can absolutely take a look at this.--Launchballer 11:36, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
@Georgeykiwi: I've done a bunch of work on this, although I may well come back to it. I'm pretty sure this would need an image to become a GA (and in fact I'm still wondering what to do about Sim0ne, which is currently nominated and doesn't have one). Incidentally, while I'm asking, do you by any chance own the copyright to any images of Piri & Tommy that aren't of the back of Tommy's head? I'm planning on renominating Piri for FA when I have 6/7 GAs, and I'm planning on expanding that article nearer the time in order to refamiliarise myself with the sources. (Here's hoping Tommy's mellowed on mentioning his family history - "that Piri & Tommy comprise a member of an aristocratic family and a porn star" would make a brilliant DYK hook.)--Launchballer 12:41, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
Hiya! I literally saw Honey Revenge live on Friday night so can add an image I took now! Also, I unfortunately don't have any pictures of Tommy but have loads of piri from gigs! George (talk) 17:47, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
Thought you might. (I've been at a few gigs myself, but I have severe coordination problems and so quite literally cannot take photos without risking a fall.) It would be good if you could upload the ones of piri - I don't expect to need them, but given this comment from the first FA it would be nice to have something more concrete, belt and braces and all that.--Launchballer 20:32, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Honey Revenge/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Launchballer (talk · contribs) 19:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Reidgreg (talk · contribs) 14:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
CoNominator: Georgeykiwi (talk · contribs)


### Introductory comments
Please take all review comments as suggestions.  I'm generally willing to discuss anything.  If you want to discuss a specific point, please do so right below that point, indenting another level.  General comments can go at the end of the page.  I try to be thorough with my reviews so this is a bit long.  Please let me know if you have any trouble understanding the markup that I'm using.
I did some minor MOS fixes and reference tidying; if you disagree with any of that, let me know and we can discuss it as part of the review.  I'm going to try something a little different from my previous reviews and handle the prose in order rather than source-by-source.


### Notability
Before jumping in to the review, I want to address notability. It seems that the band has only released one album, hasn't charted or won a major (national) award, so it doesn't get the presumption of notability and depends on the depth of coverage. Most of the sources are interviews, passing mentions, or reprints of press releases. So it's a bit on the borderline of the notability criteria at WP:BAND. Looking for the best independent sources which are producing significant original content on the band, I find:

source 1 Confidence is a state of mind Dork has about 400 words of original content
source 4 Honey Revenge: "Bands who don't provide safe spaces are f*cking up big time"  Kerrang! about 400 words original.
source 18 Album review: Honey Revenge – Retrovision Kerrang! about 315 words.
source 19 ALBUM REVIEW: Retrovision - Honey Revenge Distorted Sound. about 650 words – good!
I feel that my wordcounts are being generous because some of this may be paraphrased from press releases, but I feel it still squeaks by for notability, with three different publications.  I may not have written the article or brought it to scrutiny at GAN until they'd released a second album, but here we are. Just prepare yourself if someone does question notability.


### Criterion
I will udpate this checklist as the review progresses.

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 (reference section):  b (inline 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 
Meets criteria and promoted to GA


### Review comments
#### History section 1
While studying at Musicians Institute in Hollywood, Los Angeles, Devin Papadol formed a band with four of her classmates, which achieved minor local success; one video, of the band performing at a skate shop, Source 1. Did not spot the part about the other four being classmates at MI. The prose is a little confusing.  Suggest simplifying the sentence structure: Devin Papadol and four of her classmates from the Musicians Institute in Hollywood, Los Angeles, formed a band, which achieved minor local success. One of their music videos, in which the band performs at a skate shop,
Added source and otherwise reworded.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
Rephrase reads better but it looks like the same source to me. That source has "Devin beginning her musical career by studying at Hollywood's Musicians Institute" and "The band Devin had formed while studying at MI" but I don't see it saying that her bandmates were MI students.?
Cut "with four of her classmates"; I suppose I could probably get away with using page 13 of [1] for this as it has an editor but I don't think it's necessary.--Launchballer 12:59, 19 January 2025 (UTC) Checked
went viral. One of the video's viewers was Donovan Lloyd, Nothing in source 1 or 2 about the video going viral. Suggest: was seen by Donovan Lloyd,
Added source.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Verified
[Donovan Lloyd] who had been the guitarist as a freshman in high school with several seniors in high school, and was about to move to Los Angeles from Georgia. source 3. He says (in an interview) that he joined his first band in high school, but it doesn't say that he was in this same band when he was about to move to Los Angeles. In fact, source 3 doesn't mention any of the underlined part. Source 1 or 2 could be used to cover the move from Georgia, but again not to connect this with his first high school band.  We should be careful about combining sources to synthesize facts (WP:SYNTH). I'm also a bit confused about whether it's Lloyd or the whole Georgia band moving to Los Angeles and joining Papadol (see "They" below).
Added a ref for Georgia, trimmed Los Angeles and high school band (it's arguably WP:INDISCRIMINATE anyway), and otherwise reworded.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Verified
I feel that it might be good here to include that Lloyd had just graduated from high school (source 1).
Added.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Verified
They source 4. Okay, so is this about choice of pronouns? The second paragraph of the source seems to use "they" for each of Donny and Devin, but the third paragraph refers to Devin as "she/her", and paragraph 5 refers to Devin as both "her" and "their" in the same sentence. Later in the interview Donny says he's non-binary. I find this all very confusing, and perhaps the text should (using this source) say a little to explain it for the reader.  Something like: Lloyd, who identifies as non-binary and uses the pronoun "they/them", unless it can be avoided altogether. A possibility is to put it in a footnote so it's less obtrusive (I can code that if you want). This may require examination of recent sources. (See MOS:IDENTITY and MOS:SINGULARTHEY.) I did not poll the sources, but I saw "they" used for Donny enough that I'm okay with that if you feel it's the right call.
Paragraph 5 of that source is clearly an error; Lloyd uses they/them pronouns. I added a note and changed 'freshman' to 'freshperson'.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
 Verified: Thanks for the footnote.
[They] contacted the band to ask if they knew of any bands in need of guitarists; as it happened, the band had just lost theirs, so Lloyd sent in an audition video. source 2. Continuing from the above, and with the first sentence of the next paragraph, it's unclear if Lloyd or the whole Georgia band were moving to Los Angeles. It's also repetitive (and confusing) with "band" repeated. Suggest: [Lloyd] contacted Papadol's band, asking about opportunities for guitarists in Los Angeles. Learning that Papadol's band had a vacancy, Lloyd sent an audition video and joined the group.
Reworded.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Verified
Initially a five-piece, the COVID-19 pandemic prompted three of its remaining members to leave. source 2. Didn't spot the underlined part in source 2, but source 1 can cover it.  Suggest: The remainder of the five-member band broke apart during the COVID-19 pandemic, leaving Lloyd and Papadol to form the musical duo Honey Revenge. (This might fit better at the end of the first paragraph.) The source has the band's name so let's use that and get it established early.
Reworded. I've cut the paragraph in half and merged it at either end.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Verified
In 2021, source 5.
Papadol and Lloyd released their debut single, "Miss Me", under the name "Honey Revenge"; source 6. The citation template for source 6 has |website=Deaf New but the website identifies itself as that of a club called "The Deaf Institute".  I feel that "under the name" suggests the name changes, which doesn't seem to be the case here.  Depending on whether the previous rephrasing suggestions are used, suggest simplifying: Honey Revenge released its debut single "Miss Me".
Corrected reference and trimmed sentence.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Verified
their name, which took Papadol and Lloyd six months to decide upon, was intended to describe the aesthetic of the band, as Papadol had wanted to make pop rock, and wanted something cutesy but rigid. source 7. Okay, found this 2 minutes in to the 8-minute video. (In the future, though not a GA requirement, please include the time of the information in a video, as you would the page number for a book.) It's a direct quote so should be in quotation marks.  Suggest:  The duo had considered names for the band over six months, Papadol wanting it to be "sweet and cutesy" but "rigid and rock" to encapsulate their pop rock aesthetic.
Largely changed, with one tweak to attribute the quotes properly.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Verified
["Miss Me"] The song had been initially written by Papadol while in her previous band three and a half years earlier, source 2. Checking timeframe, the source is from December 2021, the year "Miss Me" was released, and says (interview) that it was written about 3 1/2 years ago "for that other project".  (An interview in source 8 says it was written in "2018 or 2019" which would have made it between 3 11/12 and 2 years before December 2021.)  Does not specifically mention the earlier band (which is never mentioned by name) but that suggests something previously mentioned and, though the interview could have been edited out of order, it's probably a safe bet.  I'm going to hold a rephrase here, as I feel the paragraph could use some restructuring.
Well, I've certainly done that.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Great!
and featured a voicemail from the song's subject; source 8
[Miss Me] the track's release was delayed so the band had a collection of singles ready. source 9. I don't think it actually says that. It says that the duo had a bunch of incomplete songs before the release of "Miss Me" and that the duo wanted a collection of songs ready before they started releasing, but not that they delayed releasing "Miss Me".  Perhaps another source says this?
Reworded.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Verified
How would you feel about adding something here from source 1 along the lines of "Papadol had learned at MI about marketing music and building a fanbase" ... [and wanted a collection of songs ready before releasing anything] ?
I think this would be relevant for an article about Papadol, I think it would be INDISCRIMINATE here.--Launchballer 12:59, 19 January 2025 (UTC) Accepted


#### History section 2
In June 2022, the band released "Distracted" alongside a music video, source 5
before signing to Thriller Records and releasing "Ride" the following August, a track about experiencing good things after low periods. source 10. The reportage matches this sequence of events but doesn't actually verify it. The duo announced having signed to Thriller in August, but there's nothing to say that they hadn't signed before August, maybe even before June. As for the underlined part, this should be "according to Honey Revenge".
I've reworded the first part of this. Honey Revenge wrote the song and would know what they wrote it about, so I don't think this requires attribution.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Verified
Please see note at bottom under General discussion; tagging this with ?
A November 2022 single, "Rerun", source 11. The source, dated 11 November 2022, says it's a "new single".
["Rerun"] was part of a batch of singles produced between making "Miss Me" and releasing it, source 9. Again, I don't think the source actually says this.  It says that they were working on "Rerun" for "a long time" in comparison to 2 years, so more than 2 years. When the final version was produced/recorded, I don't know.
I cut that clause altogether.
["Rerun"] and was written about Papadol's pandemic experience of living the same day repeatedly. source 2. Consider adding "unhappily" before living.
Added.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Verified
In February 2023, the band released "Are You Impressed?", a track about the stresses of the internet, alongside a music video. source 12. Dated 17 February 2023 for a "new single and video". The description of the song's theme should be 'according to Papadol'.
Again, I don't think this requires attribution.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
The following month, [March] they announced their debut album Retrovision, source 13.
and released "Airhead", Papadol's take on her own impulsive thinking. source 14. I put impulsive thinking in double quotes as a direct quotation.
"Impulsive thinking" is the actual term, I don't think quotation's needed here.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Checked
In April 2023, it was announced that Honey Revenge would support Arrows in Action on tour, source 15. This tour, slated for July 2023, only has six dates. The announcement describes Honey Revenge as "special guests". Do you have a source that confirms the tour actually happened and included Honey Revenge?
There are a few blogs of wildly varying reliability that review various gigs, however I was advised at Talk:Dead Pony/GA1 that concerts are unencyclopedic, so I've cut it.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Checked
and later that month the band released a further Retrovision single, "Worst Apology", about stubborn people. source 16. Again, this should be "according to Papadol" and that it's about "standing up for yourself" regarding stubborn people who "project guilt".  Suggest: which Papadol said was about empowering oneself against victim blaming.
Partially added.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Verified
A further single, "Favorite Song", was released from the same album that May and was a sarcastic track about an intermittent texter. source 17.  Again, the source is a quote from Papadol (according to...) and calls it a "sarcastic melody" and "waiting on a text".  Suggest: That May, the single "Favorite Song" was released, which Papadol described as juxtaposing a playful melody with lyrics about frustrations at being "strung along".
"Sarcastic melody" is unencyclopedic and has been cut; reworded the rest.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Checked
In June 2023, the pair released Retrovision, which received positive reviews from Kerrang! source 18.
and Distorted Sound Magazine, and which included "Distracted", "Rerun", source 19.
"Are You Impressed?" source 18
"Worst Apology", "Favourite Song", and "Habitual", source 19
the last of which a music video was released for. source 20. Might want to check if this is still live; I used the archive.
Grrr! No, it isn't, I've adjusted the ref. Checked
In October 2023, it was announced that they would support Meet Me at the Altar on their "Say It To My Face" North American Tour, source 21. Honey Revenge is only mentioned in the subheadline (above the byline), which is not a reliable source per WP:HEADLINES. Can you find another source, preferably coverage of the tour rather than a pre-tour annoucement?
Cut per above.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Checked
and in March 2024, they announced that they would tour Europe that May, source 22. Only 2 of 8 dates are in Europe (this is following Brexit) but I suppose that's okay.
Cut anyway.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
including two shows at Slam Dunk Festival. source 23. I don't think it's all there and that it would be good to add source 22 to the end of the sentence for better coverage.
I cut this per above.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Checked
That month, [May] they released "Recipe For Disaster", which had been written on a TikTok Live around the same time as "Habitual" and "Favourite Song" about Papadol's emotions around the time of the band's first tour, and announced an extended version of Retrovision, source 24 "used". Verifies TikTok Live. Dated 24 May, it says they're preparing to release "Recipe For Disaster". At the very end there is an emboldened line "Honey Revenge's new single 'Recipe For Disaster' is out now." but that seems like an update, leaving the release date unclear. I'm also unclear on the timing with the two other singles. The 'about' should be 'according to Papadol'.
I checked the release date against Spotify and it was 24 May, so I added an extra source to that effect.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Verified
which included brand new track "Medicine" along with two re-imagined versions of tracks from the album. source 25 ":6". The word brand is puffery and doesn't add anything, suggest removing it. I feel that re-imagined versions has tone issues and is taken directly from the source.  Suggest either putting it in quotations or, better yet, to rephrase as "remixes" which is a little less surprising.
Trimmed and changed to "remixes".Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Verified


#### Artistry
In January 2023, Papadol stated in an interview with Rock Sound that her biggest inspirations were You Me at Six, Paramore, The Band Camino, and "Disney rock" such as Hannah Montana, Demi Lovato, Jonas Brothers, and Aly & AJ. source 7 ":2". I put Rock Sound in italics. I did not notice this in the source.  Please provide a time in the video when the information begins.
Assuming the transcript is accurate, 2:30 onwards. (Most YouTube videos have a 'Show transcript' button if you click the description.)Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
I'm not even finding "description" on the YouTube browser interface, but verified the material at 2:30. Checked
She sung on stage with Paramore on 19 July 2018, after the band's lead singer Hayley Williams invited audience members on stage to sing "Misery Business". source 26. But I feel that you're burying the lead here. Suggest something like: Papadol gained the confidence to pursue a career in music in July 2018, when she was invited on stage from the audience of a Paramore concert to sing "Misery Business" alongside Hayley Williams.
Added.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Verified
She stated in a May 2023 interview with Dork that she spent much of her teenage years infatuated with Sleeping with Sirens and was so obsessed with Paramore's "Turn It Off" that she created an email account incorporating its lyric, while Lloyd stated that they took up the guitar after playing Guitar Hero and that they wanted to become a live guitarist after seeing State Champs in concert. source 3. I put Guitar Hero in italics.  Would 'concert guitarist' work better than 'live guitarist'?
Yes it would. Reworded.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Verified
In an interview with Kerrang! in June 2023, Papadol stated that her "first introductions" to music were the "punk-rock chicks" Hannah Montana and Demi Lovato and the "edgier pop" of P!nk and Katy Perry and that she was also influenced by Paramore and the metalcore scene, while Lloyd told the publication that they were influenced by shapeshifting "chameleon" bands such as You Me at Six and Pierce the Veil. source 4 "influence". I put Kerrang! in italics. This is a run-on sentence. Perhaps it should be combined with material elsewhere in the section to have inspirations, influences and introductions together?
I've split the sentence in half and merged it into one paragraph. Checked
Scene Queen is a fan of the band. source 27.


#### Members
Band members. source 10. The source is August 2022 and outdated for "present".  Change "present" to "2022", rephrase to "as of August 2022", or find a more recent source. Source 24 is May 2024 and seems to be the most recent that names them both.  Found another from December 2024 (under Breadth, below).
I've actually cut the ref altogether per WP:REPEATCITE.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
I don't like "present" used uncited, but it's true today so:  Accepted


#### Tours
European Tour (2024) source 28. For consistency with the others, please add "eight shows" to the parenthetic.
I see you already did this.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
 Facepalm   Checked
Loveless – World Tour (2023; twelve shows) source 29. I changed the citation template to {{cite Instagram}}. From the poster (small font) it looks like Honey Revenge is opening for the back half of the tour, which I count as 12 dates. Keep in mind that this is a primary source.
I think this is mundane enough that I can use it for this.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC)  Agree
The Used – UK Tour (2023; five shows) source 24 "used". It only says "some shows", otherwise good.
Cut.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Checked
Stand Atlantic – UK & Europe Tour (2024; fourteen shows) source 25 ":6". Would prefer a source once the tour is underway or concluded, if you can find one.
In my experience, the only post-announcement sources for tours are reviews of single dates. If this is a problem, I will cut this.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
No problem.  Accepted


#### Breadth & focus
Took a look around via ProQuest and the Wikipedia Library but didn't find anything.  Google News turned up this from last month:

Storrs, Mikaila (10 December 2024). "Honey Revenge announces 'The Loving and Losing Tour' with special guests Wolf & Bear and Daisy Grenade". Melodic Magazine.
You could put it under tours, North America scheduled 2025, 33 dates.  This mentions the duo by names to include with section Members.

Added to tours. I find it incredible that the actual release of the expanded version of Retrovision has received no coverage whatsoever.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC)


#### Neutrality
No neutrality problems detected.


#### Stability
Stable:  article is less than one year old, under 40 edits, with a single reversion related to a category-for-discussion conflict elsewhere on the wiki.


#### Media
Two images from concert performances. (Too bad about the security guard looking at the camera front-and-center.)  Both have CC licenses. Captions are consistent with descriptions on file pages, and good for MOS formatting.


### General discussion
I think that's a good start.  I'll have some more prose comments after my second pass.  Please let me know here when you're done making changes and you're ready for me to check the article again. Happy editing! – Reidgreg (talk) 22:12, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

I believe I've responded to all your concerns; I really don't think there's any point attributing the band or any of their members for subjects of songs they wrote, but by all means ping if I've missed anything.Launchballer (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
@Launchballer: I would agree with you if it was "song X was written about" or "song X was inspired by" because it'd be clear that'd be from the writer/creator.  But when it's "song X is about", that's very general. Scholars, critics, and popular opinion may vary from that of the artist regarding the overall themes of the work (e.g.: Flower paintings of Georgia O'Keeffe). Looking over them again the context makes it clear that 3 of the 7 'about's are coming from Papadol (or her experiences). If you could also make it clear for the first one, "Ride", then I feel it'd be easier for the reader to assume the rest are also from the artist(s).
Otherwise, I like your phrasing changes and the lead. I've marked three places above with ? for attention. – Reidgreg (talk) 06:26, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
I've added "written" before the "about"s that lack and need it.--Launchballer 12:59, 19 January 2025 (UTC) Verified
Okay, great!  I'm happy to promote this! Y Reidgreg (talk) 16:07, 19 January 2025 (UTC)