# Talk:Cherry on Top (Bini song)

I'm done with the photograph with PonteFino Residences in Batangas City photo. It's at File:PonteFino Residences in Batangas City.jpg Nedia Wanna talk? Stalk my edits 00:24, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

I have added it at Cherry on Top (Bini song) § Music video. Thanks! AstrooKai (Talk) 11:58, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
Your welcome:) Nedia Wanna talk? Stalk my edits 00:42, 14 February 2025 (UTC)


### Cherry on Top (Bini song)
Previous peer review

I am nominating to peer review again because I really wanna push this on FAC. This is the second time that I nominated this, and nominated twice on FAC. Your suggestions and changes it will help on me. Thanks! ROY is WAR Talk! 10:30, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

@Royiswariii: According to the peer review guidelines, nominations are limited to one open request per editor. You currently have two peer reviews open at the same time, with this one and with the one for "Tamang Panahon". Please make sure to fully close one of these reviews. Instructions for doing this can be found on the guideline page. Thank you. Aoba47 (talk) 15:24, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
I withdrawn my nomination on Tamang Panahon, so I can focus here. ROY is WAR Talk! 00:02, 23 February 2025 (UTC)


#### Comments from Arconning
group's milestone, "milestone" is a bit puffy. "Distinction" could be better.
Skylar Mones and composed by Boy Matthews, Gaby Ramirez, Shintaro Yasuda, and Skylar Mones., Mones' first name doesn't have to be repeated.
On November 10, the Los Angeles Clippers dance team, Clippers Spirit, performed "Cherry on Top" during the halftime show of the NBA game between the Toronto Raptors and LA Clippers., specify the date. Other media could probably include covers of the song that are notable (i.e. in news articles).
The fair use image highlighting PonteFino Residences doesn't have a proper license, with its "Minimal use" section in its summary saying, "It will be minimal by making the article a better quality." This should probably be either removed or replaced with an image with proper licensing.
...the song's title, and sign language is incorporated during the chorus., could specify which sign language if mentioned. The flow of the sentence towards "... and sign language..." doesn't make grammatical sense so that should be fixed through rewording.
on the Top Philippine Songs., remove "the".
The accolades section could use some text. Dates of their nomination, the dates/which ceremony they were awarded on, etc.\
Here are my comments so far, will comment further on. Arconning (talk) 14:23, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
Hi, Arconning! Thank you for your reviewing this article.
"milestone" is a bit puffy. "Distinction" could be better. Done ROY is WAR Talk! 08:32, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
Skylar Mones and composed by Boy Matthews, Gaby Ramirez, Shintaro Yasuda, and Skylar Mones., Mones' first name doesn't have to be repeated. Done ROY is WAR Talk! 08:32, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
On November 10, the Los Angeles Clippers dance team, Clippers Spirit, performed "Cherry on Top" during the halftime show of the NBA game between the Toronto Raptors and LA Clippers., specify the date. Other media could probably include covers of the song that are notable (i.e. in news articles). I don't understand what you're saying is about "specify dates", it is already added as "On November 10". ROY is WAR Talk! 08:32, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
The fair use image highlighting PonteFino Residences doesn't have a proper license, with its "Minimal use" section in its summary saying, "It will be minimal by making the article a better quality." This should probably be either removed or replaced with an image with proper licensing. I removed it because I don't know how will I fix that. ROY is WAR Talk! 08:32, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
...the song's title, and sign language is incorporated during the chorus., could specify which sign language if mentioned. The flow of the sentence towards "... and sign language..." doesn't make grammatical sense so that should be fixed through rewording. They don't specify what sign language they used, however some expert on sign language saying it is a Filipino sign language but I did not add that since there is no source and it may be a original research. ROY is WAR Talk! 08:32, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
on the Top Philippine Songs., remove "the". Done ROY is WAR Talk! 08:32, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
The accolades section could use some text. Dates of their nomination, the dates/which ceremony they were awarded on, etc.  Working Done. ROY is WAR Talk! 08:32, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
I'll update you if I done on accolades section. ROY is WAR Talk! 08:32, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
@Royiswariii Specify as in what year the event was held, as the site is an encyclopedia it should specify which November as information like that will be outdated in a year or so.
multiple awards from diffrent, wrong spelling.
For the accolades section, the mention of the song placing in the listicle made by Rolling Stone should be mentioned in the prose as well.
Should probably be added: The song topped iTunes' charts,[1] a Christmas remix of the song has been made,[2] dance covers made by Unis and SB19 (placed in the other media section)/[3][4]
Arconning (talk) 13:41, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
Hi, Arconning! I am apologizing for taking this too long due to my schoolwork. I hope you'll understand.
multiple awards from diffrent, wrong spelling. Done
For the accolades section, the mention of the song placing in the listicle made by Rolling Stone should be mentioned in the prose as well. Done
Should probably be added: The song topped iTunes' charts,[1] a Christmas remix of the song has been made,[2] dance covers made by Unis and SB19 (placed in the other media section) 'Done.
Do you have any opinions or suggestions to the Composition and lyrics? I cannot find any sources about the lyrics and composition of COT, maybe it is a burden sources? That section is crucial to me to be honest 'cause this is the previous problem on past FAC. If you have last suggestions, feel free to mention me again. ROY is WAR Talk! 08:57, 20 March 2025 (UTC)


#### NØ
"Star Music released on July 11, 2024 as the first pre-single for the upcoming extended play Biniverse." - There is a missing word here. It is not clear what Star Music released.
"The song also gained significant attention on YouTube Philippines, becoming the top trending music video and reaching two million views within 24 hours of its release." - The linked article is just about YouTube in general and not YouTube in Philippines, so the pipe is misleading. Also, doesn't the Philippines use the global YouTube site, and not a different one that is just for them? So it is not clear what is meant here.
"The song has received three accolades, including the Music Video of the Year at the Myx Music Awards." - No need to provide an exact number for the amount of accolades unless one directly appears in a secondary source. There is also no need for "the" in "the Music Video of the Year"
You could include the release year for Talaarawan.
"Following the successful promotion of Talaarawan" - What do you mean by "the successful promotion"? Is this a characterization from a secondary source?
There is additional information about the mixing, mastering, etc. personnel in the Credits and personnel section that isn't present in the article body.
"Bini became the first international artist after the K-pop group Exo to have a song previewed in the Superstar game series." - Neither is an "artist" as they are bands of multiple people
Have you thought about merging the "Critical reception" and "Commercial performance" sections into a combined "Reception" section? They are very small currently.
Add captions to the chart table.
I am also not sure about the "In other media" section as that looks like it could easily be merged into one of the others due to its size.--NØ 10:25, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
Hi, NØ! Thank you for your reviewing my nomination.
There is a missing word here. It is not clear what Star Music released. Done, you can suggest to adjust the word if you want. ROY is WAR Talk! 02:26, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
The linked article is just about YouTube in general and not YouTube in Philippines, so the pipe is misleading. Also, doesn't the Philippines use the global YouTube site, and not a different one that is just for them? So it is not clear what is meant here. I removed the wikilink. Also, according to Rappler (ref 31), Cherry on Top was recognized as the number two music video on YouTube Philippines. ROY is WAR Talk! 02:26, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
"The song has received three accolades, including the Music Video of the Year at the Myx Music Awards." - No need to provide an exact number for the amount of accolades unless one directly appears in a secondary source. There is also no need for "the" in "the Music Video of the Year"
You could include the release year for Talaarawan. Where can I add that? ROY is WAR Talk! 02:26, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
"Following the successful promotion of Talaarawan" - What do you mean by "the successful promotion"? Is this a characterization from a secondary source? ref 6 from Billboard Philippines. ROY is WAR Talk! 02:26, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
There is additional information about the mixing, mastering, etc. personnel in the Credits and personnel section that isn't present in the article body. I have second thought for this whether should I cite the apple music on Composition and lyrics to add the producers of the song. What do you think? ROY is WAR Talk! 02:26, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
Neither is an "artist" as they are bands of multiple people rewording to group. I am also thinking it can be a girl group or Filipino girl group. ROY is WAR Talk! 02:26, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
Have you thought about merging the "Critical reception" and "Commercial performance" sections into a combined "Reception" section? They are very small currently. Yes. Done. You can still suggest to adjust the section if you want. ROY is WAR Talk! 02:26, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
Add captions to the chart table. Done per above reviewer. ROY is WAR Talk! 02:26, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
I am also not sure about the "In other media" section as that looks like it could easily be merged into one of the others due to its size. I agree, it can be added to Reception or Promotion and release? ROY is WAR Talk! 02:26, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
Note:I am also struggling on the Compostion and lyrics were "Featuring "playful and confident" lyrics, the song embraces themes of uniqueness, tackling the "unique personality of a person that one could never get enough [of]".". Bini did not mention behind that song. However, they what Cherry on top means which is quoted and also on BroadwayWorld, although it is unreliable, but it can be considered since it was an interview per WP:ABOUTSELF. What do you think? ROY is WAR Talk! 02:26, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello, just informing everyone that I will be trying to get this article to FA-quality. Tagging this article's top contributors @AstrooKai @Royiswariii @Borgenland @Freedom Wall @Acrom12 and @RFNirmala just so you're aware. I have found a bunch of new sources or helpful ones that simply weren't included the first time around and will be adding them, among other actions. In the meantime, if anyone could help me change all the dates to MDY (e.g. December 6, 2024) format, as stated on top of the article, instead of YDM (e.g. 2024-12-6), please feel free to do so. I would really love to see a Bini-related article get FA status and feel like this one is a good candidate, given the sheer number of articles that have been written about it. Bloomagiliw (talk) 00:01, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

You may check the last three discussions of FAC. First discussion, second discussion, third discussion. Let us know what can we do and when we'll nominate it. ROY is WAR Talk! 01:24, 9 October 2025 (UTC)
My suggestion is to change publishers to GMA News Online → GMA Integrated News. ROY is WAR Talk! 01:30, 9 October 2025 (UTC)
So... according to the "Revision history statistics" page, I'm technically the top editor for this article now. But I'm not going to nominate it unless/until the rest of you tell me we're good to go. I've done a lot of work on the article, but I'm going to add some more finishing touches later. Bloomagiliw (talk) 05:54, 9 October 2025 (UTC)
Bloomagiliw, The reviewer they have a problem on Composition and lyrics section. They said it on first discussion or second discussion. ROY is WAR Talk! 06:11, 9 October 2025 (UTC)
I have heavily rewritten that section. I removed the sentences the reviewers mentioned and tried to make it clearer both structurally and in terms of prose. You can read the updated section now.
Edit, this is what the reviewer said: "Oppose as mentioned by Graham, the prose is substandard. Sentences are dropped in confusingly and organised non-thematically. The ending sentence of the first paragraph of "Composition and lyrics" is out of place, while the order of the two sentences in the second paragraph are reversed from what I would expect. The first and last sentences of "Commercial performance" discuss a music video that hasn't been discussed yet. There is consistent MOS:OVERSECTION, along with other MOS:LAYOUT issues. BroadwayWorld is not a reliable source per WP:RSP; putting that aside, "with layers of UK garage beat targeted towards Bini's global audience" is not what it says. Discussion of the Instagram video teaser is split between "Composition and lyrics" and "Promotion and release". I cannot describe this article as well-written to a professional standard as of now. Suggest withdrawal, and finding a copyeditor who does more than just replacing commas."Bloomagiliw (talk) 06:13, 9 October 2025 (UTC)
I'll let other editors what they think if this is done and ready to nominate. ROY is WAR Talk! 06:40, 9 October 2025 (UTC)
Pinging you guys again, as it's been over a week. @Borgenland @AstrooKai @Freedom Wall @Acrom12 @RFNirmala
I might proceed with the FA review nomination alone if nobody responds.
Bloomagiliw (talk) 14:34, 19 October 2025 (UTC)
I'm okay with another FA nom, just make sure that the article is truly ready this time. Best regards, AstrooKai (Talk) 02:19, 20 October 2025 (UTC)
I think there's a good amount of fancruft going around this article, but I won't stop a nomination. Proceed however you like. Freedom Wall (talk) 04:03, 20 October 2025 (UTC)
Would you mind elaborating on which parts are "fancruft"? Because I only expanded each section. I don't see anything here that isn't present in FA-class song articles like "Single Ladies (Put a Ring on It)"; in fact, they're even more detailed about every section included in this version of the article.This version of the COT article has more detailed information about the song's composition, music video, reception, live performances, and uses in popular culture. Would really love it if you actually try to explain what about any of it is fancruft rather than vaguely saying "there's a lot of fancruft here." Thank you. Bloomagiliw (talk) 06:01, 20 October 2025 (UTC)
Alright, I've just seen your edits, Freedom Wall. Thank you for the effort, though again I do wish we could've discussed them first.
I'm putting back the tiny bit of detail about the Billboard Philippines Mainstage mishap. I think I get it now, what you mean by "there's fancruft here," and I also think this is a problem you and the other Filipino editors share. Not trying to be rude here, but you guys can't distinguish between "fancruft" and "the amount of information needed to enrich an article." I recall that I wrote a "Media image" section for Maloi when I was fairly new to Wikipedia, and AstrooKai just completely deleted it because it was supposedly fancruft. I restored it when Howard the Duck AfD'ed her article and it's why Maloi's article wasn't deleted.
Detail is not fancruft. As I mentioned, please take a look at FA-status song articles like the Beyonce one.
In July 2009, Beyoncé gave a concert at the Staples Center in Los Angeles where American actor Tom Cruise danced with her and her dancers as they performed the dance routine of "Single Ladies". At the MTV Video Music Awards on September 13, 2009, Beyoncé performed "Single Ladies" backed by "an army of single ladies" on stage. In a poll conducted by Billboard magazine, the performance was ranked as the seventh best in the history of MTV Video Music Awards. A critic wrote in the magazine: "The world gave a collective 'whoa' when Beyonce unleashed her 'Single Ladies' video, but to see those dance moves come to life at the 2009 VMAs was beyond eye-popping."
You see that, right? The paragraph mentions details about the performance and how it was perceived by a critic. One of the main criticisms for this article in the first FA review is that it's too thin. It lacks detail. I am putting detail in. Please (and I am addressing not just you, Freedom Wall, but the other Filipino editors), let's learn the difference between detail (good) and excessive detail. Detail is not fancruft. Bloomagiliw (talk) 01:43, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
I have no problems with including details of a notable live performance. The problem with your examples is that they simply do not compare. The VMAs is a very notable and significant event in the music industry. I would also include a review for that live performance considering how well-received it is. Inviting an A-list actor like Tom Cruise to a concert can also be noteworthy in a live performance/concert tour section. On the other hand, a dance cover by a barely known K-pop group is not. Lots of lesser known groups try to do dance covers of more popular songs to gain attention. Notice how I kept Katseye’s cover and the NBA dance routines in the article? Those are events with wide coverage and are therefore much more notable. Choreography being taught at a semi-known workshop is also not that noteworthy. Again, this could be said with most songs. That’s what a workshop is for. TLDR, the problem isn’t about what you’re saying you’re doing. It’s the scale/notability of the details you’re applying those concepts to. Your logic is sound, but your examples are not.
I also see some of your other examples in the edit summaries, and you’re wrong with what I would consider trivial. A cup noodle commercial with the Beyoncé song does imply social influence/general public acceptance because of its scope, especially in the United States. Your examples in this article are just not comparable because they lack notability.
Regarding the sneakers tidbit, there’s also nothing being said about the sneakers. Their fashion game is good because of the sneakers how exactly? It reads like the article just wants to praise them for being fashion-worthy but not the why. It’s also such a minor accomplishment that that that’s why I would consider it fancruft. But if you do want to include this, I would make a subsection for the dance practice video under Music video rather than In popular culture because the latter implies that this is something that is actually being consumed in popular culture when it’s not.
But if you want to keep all those details above, then be my guest. I’m not that invested in the article, and if other editors won’t mind those details in an FA article, then you do you. Freedom Wall (talk) 04:20, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
"On the other hand, a dance cover by a barely known K-pop group is not." Unis is a reasonably successful group and are notable enough to have their own page on this site. Universe Ticket, where they were formed, was also a really popular show. Your objection to them being included because they're "barely known" isn't really rooted in objective reality, but your subjective perception of them. Most song articles that have FA status do list cover versions by people who are even less known than Unis. Who knows who Ryan Adams is? But his cover is mentioned in "Shake It Off".
The Unis cover is mentioned because a reliable media source that isn't affiliated with Bini's agency decided to report on it. Same with the workshop, which is organized by a major organization (Globe Telecom), mind you. Globe is absolutely notable in this context, when we're talking about a Filipino group's song.
I do agree that the sneakers bit could be removed, but I just wasn't sure where to place the info about the dance practice video they released.
But I want to point out your wording -- "achievement." I don't consider any of those things achievements. I believe an article like this should simply document what is being said, done, and written about the work. None of these are really achievements, which is why all praise and negativity are in quotes. This is simply providing information on how the work is received. These aren't achievements. I believe that's where our perspectives mainly differ. I don't see these things as fancruft because they aren't inherently positive, they just happened and were notable enough for reputable sources to write about them.You've already said you're not invested in this article, so this response isn't for you, really. I'm just addressing your points in case anyone else wants to work on the page. Bloomagiliw (talk) 04:44, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
I think our opinions just vary on how to judge notability. Just also replying to comment on that subject:
Ryan Adams covering "Shake It Off" could be considered notable because he is a Grammy-nominated act, with an extensively recognized body of work. I'm not aware of who he is, but reputable awards are an objective measure of notability. His lead section also mentions that he made a cover album of Taylor Swift's 1989 album, and that cover album has done well in charts and was included in several best album listicles. Including his cover of "Shake It Off" in the page is well-reasoned.
That said, upon checking Unis' page, I see that they're now a multi-awarded act. My measure of the group's success is rooted in commercial sales, awards/recognition, and reasonably documented virality/recognizability. The reason I removed that cover in the first place was because when it was first added in, they were a fresh group with a lack of notability other than the fact they were a product of Universe Ticket when the cover was released.
As for the workshop, Globe is a major notable organization, correct. But not everything the organization does is notable. A choreography workshop from G-Fest is not that notable, considering Globe's notability does not stem from its contributions towards the entertainment industry, much less dance-related industries. The workshop isn't even the main attraction for the event.
Lastly, nowhere in my reply did I use the word "achievement". I used "accomplishment", which is what the group has done rather than what they have achieved, and I'm writing whether what they have done is objectively measured as notable. That's all. Freedom Wall (talk) 05:42, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
Also, on a separate note, I think you should move "In popular culture" to the Reception section, below "Critical reception". "Live performances" can be its own section. "In other uses" sounds a bit too vague. Freedom Wall (talk) 06:13, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
I'll look at other articles and think about it. Of course, any one of you can apply that change yourself. Bloomagiliw (talk) 06:19, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
You're aware that "achievement" and "accomplishment" are synonyms, right? Also, you claimed that Unis are a "barely known" group. Even if Ryan Adams has a lot of awards, that doesn't make him "known." It means he's an established professional, but not "known." Beck has more awards than Sabrina Carpenter, but those aren't the right metric for him being "known."
You also removed the mention of Unis yesterday, not when they were a freshly debuted group. To be honest, I'm not even arguing at this point because you're not going to back down even though you claim to not be invested in any of this. But I do find your arguments disingenuous and hollow.
The Philippine Star is not known for being an entertainment provider, but when they launched the P-pop app JuanCast, said app immediately got a lot of traction BECAUSE of TPS' clout. Globe clearly has more than enough clout for their entertainment-related ventures to be written about by reputable sources.
You understand this. I know you do, but you're not going to say that maybe you were wrong and what I'm saying makes sense. That's why I think we should just cut this convo. As I mentioned, I was just making sure that I can proceed with the FA review and that's it. You made some edits and I retained a lot of them. If you're not invested, we can end this conversation rather than endlessly going in circles. Appreciate the work you've done. Bloomagiliw (talk) 06:18, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
I'm only replying because your tone reads as condescending. I've already mentioned the objective measures to notability. You just chose to ignore that. I'll just clarify the Unis edit because I think I recall removing that a few times prior to this whole FA nomination but it got added back in, and that while The Philippne Star is a news source, Globe is not. I understand clearly where my stance is, and that's on clear notability and not on being known. Good luck on the FA nomination. Freedom Wall (talk) 06:56, 23 October 2025 (UTC)