Former good article nomineeStressed Out was a Music good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 16, 2020Good article nomineeNot listed

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Stressed Out (Twenty One Pilots song). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:30, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Stressed Out (Twenty One Pilots song). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:11, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 9 September 2016

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. SSTflyer 05:26, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]


– Per WP:SMALLDETAILS, this should be sufficient dab; it actually receives more views than Stress (psychological) anyway.[1] Unreal7 (talk) 20:51, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There has been a legacy with pop songs in that there was a period 2 to 3 years ago when WP:Naming conventions (music) was advocating partial disambiguation. That is the reason for reminding users of what the guideline now says. Unreal7 habitually speaks to other editors like that too, so I'm in good company. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:43, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Poor writing style

What exactly is the point of this sentence? "The video, with over 610 million views and 3.9 million likes as of September 7, 2016,[15] brought it onto list of most liked YouTube videos, but not the list of most viewed YouTube videos." Who cares if it isn't on the list of most viewed YouTube videos? That fact is irrelevant. 2601:140:8302:E260:813B:55D3:46E8:EF1E (talk) 02:38, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not poor writing style nor is it irrelevant. The list itself is irrelevant as it's the most "liked" list, and that is rarely discussed. So either the whole thing is removed or you find a better way to say that it's a video not worth watching except by fans. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:33, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Number of views/likes

I tend to update this when the video crosses a 10 million view threshold and User: Walter Görlitz recently challenged me on this. We could agree to keep it rounded down to 100 million once it reaches 700 million if 10 million is overkill, but most similar articles have always been rounded down to the 10 million (even before I started updating these!). Or we could delete the sentence entirely - I feel it's only important for videos which make it on to the top 40 list (950 million plus views). Stressed Out won't reach this for some time, if ever.

In any case, 690 million is currently more accurate and informative than 680 million and it does not bother me to make these regular updates every week or so, so I at least feel that it should not be reverted without a discussion on whether we keep the whole sentence. What do you think (in particular User: Walter Görlitz and also others)?

Tcamfield (talk) 21:59, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that it's still trivial is the real point. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:03, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Not totally sure what you mean by trivial. The way I see it, if we are going to keep the information and keep rounding to the nearest 10 million, we should keep it updated. It may not be the most important thing in the article, but it's better to keep it updated than not to. I say get rid of the whole sentence? Tcamfield (talk) 21:42, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Likes? No one cares about likes. Everyone discusses views but the discussion of likes does not happen. It's trivia. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:16, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I see, I agree - when I next update the views I will get rid of the likes. Most similar articles do not have a sentence talking about the likes. I would warn, however, that the views generally need updating more than the likes. But this action should help a bit. Tcamfield (talk) 21:54, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Stressed Out. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:39, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 November 2017

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus, default to status quo. Perennial type of RM debate, largely subjective, votes roughly split – there's not a consensus here. Jenks24 (talk) 02:18, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]


– I would like to revert the move request from last year. A year after it, Stress (psychological) and this article are now much closer in the amount of views on average. Plus, despite their song not being as popular, A Tribe Called Quest are known in the US and their song came out 20 years before this. Most likely, "Stressed Out" refers to someone being literally stressed out, not this song as much anymore. I think things need to go back to the way they were last year. JE98 (talk) 22:31, 16 November 2017 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 03:02, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose. The A Tribe called Quest song gets fewer than 5% of the pageviews of this article. Fewer than 1 out every 150 readers click on the hatnote, indicating most readers landing on this article are exactly where they mean to be. Station1 (talk) 06:12, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, put back as it was. The non-admin close and move last year wasn't a good one. Readers shouldn't be forced to go via a 2015 song if they are looking for the TV episodes or the other three songs. This is a wikt:generic title for an entertainment product and it's a diverse world where readers have different interests. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:24, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, per In ictu oculi, and any page with this stand-alone title, upper or lower cased, should probably go to "Stress" as primary and most familiar usage. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:42, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I also support moving it back as it was. This is just (ironically) causing stress to the people looking for well known human condition "Stress" and forcing them to route through song related to one region of the world or dab page. Whoever is looking for the song it is reasonable they also know about the human condition with same name (save if they're not human) and can even stop by to read it and later get their way to the song article. The opposite of this is obvious, million of people who will search for "Stress Out" have no clue of this song and not even interested in it or music in its entirety and there's no reason to route them through this song –Ammarpad (talk) 11:49, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per all the above reasons. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 18:08, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

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.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Stressed Out/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Coolmarc (talk · contribs) 06:28, 7 May 2020 (UTC)


DarklyShadows It concerns me that you only have a 1.7% contribution percentage to this article Per Good Article nomination instructions, it is preferable that nominators have contributed significantly to the article and are familiar with its subject and its cited sources. Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article on the article talk page prior to a nomination. In this case, you should have contacted User:LupEnd007 who has done 36% of the contributions to that page and is still busy contributing it. Cool Marc ✉ 20:36, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Coolmarc Hi Coolmarc! This is not the first time this user has done this. A while ago I greatly expanded David Bowie's song "The Man Who Sold the World", this user made 2 edits (both of which got reverted), then nominated it for GA without consulting me. They also clearly didn't read the article because it's currently not near GA material yet. You can also see they responded in the GA by acting annoyed that another user and I would turn on them for nominating it. This user has apparently retired from WP so it would be in our best interest to withdraw this nomination and maybe contact User:LupEnd007 to see if they want to nominate it. I just thought you should know this is not the first time this user has done something like this. Cheers :-) – zmbro (talk) 17:34, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Zmbro How did you know I nominated Stressed Out for GA in the first place? I didn't even tell you I was nominating and you have to come here and cause even more problems. It kind of worries me that you are stalking my work. DarklyShadows (talk) 18:10, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DarklyShadows It shows up on the GAN page. Since I've brought multiple articles to GA myself I sometimes like to check out reviews to see how they're going, especially for editors that I've interacted with before. One click leads to another and boom. I'm genuinely interested in other editors' projects and contributions. That's certainly not "stalking" and if that's your idea of it that's your problem. Over the years I've seen multiple editors nominate articles for both GA, FAC, and FLC that they barely contributed to and since you did the exact same thing to me a while ago, I thought I'd let Coolmarc know that this wasn't the first time. It wasn't cool at all to do that and it certainly wasn't cool here either.
Side note I'm sorry to see that you've decided to retire. I understand that WP can be stressful. I've had my fair share of stress caused by the site and I know it sucks when tons of work you've done is just deleted because one person doesn't like it. But it's a site that anyone can edit so obviously you're going to encounter many editors that don't agree with you. There has been dozens of arguments and fights over whether Stanley Kubrick's page should have an infobox for YEARS now. It's just what happens. If you do decide to retire, I wish you the best of luck irl. If you do decide to stay, I wish you the best of luck in your contributions. I know when you added pictures to Beatles articles under your old username they were helpful (some more than others) but in the future, do things that are considered ethical on the site (like what Coolmarc said above) and follow the guidelines for notability and I'm sure you'll have fewer problems. – zmbro (talk) 18:43, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

The nominator who did not contribute to the article has retired. I reached out to article's main contributor LupEnd007 on their talk page to hear if they wanted to take over from the nominator, no response from them. Therefore I am failing this. Cool Marc ✉ 06:57, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Orphaned references in Stressed Out

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Stressed Out's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "radio":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 12:18, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Stressed Out/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Shoot for the Stars (talk · contribs) 06:04, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: LastJabberwocky (talk · contribs) 20:18, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm picking up your nomination! If the way I presented the changes is too confusing, I can make the changes on the page, and then we'll discuss the changes. LastJabberwocky (talk) 20:18, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

General thing

Several times throughout the article, it capitalizes quotes preceded by a comma. Usually, (see MOS:Quote) the quotes aren't capitalized or capitalized when preceded by a colon.

Background and recording → Production

"Background" is usually about the conception of the album before the recording starts, and this sections seems to be about the song's lyrical themes (1-3 paragraphs) and generally about production (4th paragraph). The article already has "Composition" section that also talks about lyrics, so I think we should move these three lyrics-related paragraphs either into the "Composition" and rename it "Composition and lyrical themes", or make a standalone "Lyrical themes" section. While the 4th paragraph can remain under the new "Production" section.

I'll talk about these lyrical paragraphs below. Some of them repeat the information already put under "Composition", and I think can be removed.

Composition

I think we should start with this sentences introducing the character and connecting the song with the album (these are the edited 1-3 paragraphs from the current "Background and recording"): The thematic elements of the duo's second major-label studio album, Blurryface (2015), and the identity of the Blurryface character come into focus on "Stressed Out". "Stressed Out" was written by Tyler Joseph from the perspective of the character Blurryface rather than some impersonal third-person narrator. Blurryface appears as the alter-ego of Joseph, "a monster-image of his insecurities and self-hatreds", and on "Stressed Out" Joseph attempts to defeat it. In an interview with MTV News, Joseph elaborated on the Blurryface, saying "it's a guy that kind of represents all the things that I as an individual — but also everyone around me — am insecure about. When I think about insecurities and my insecurities are getting the best of me, the things that I think of are kind of a feeling of suffocation and then also the things that I create with my hands... Very dramatic, I know, but it helps me get into that character".

Then we would talk about general themes of the song in the second paragraph: Joseph's self-deprecating lyrics express anxiety over everything from his music to growing older. It can be merged with: Lyrically, "Stressed Out" is about the harsh end of adolescence. Lyrically, "Stressed Out" is about the harsh end of adolescence, diving into Tyler Joseph's ageing anxiety and his experience with making music.

The song is an ode with lyrics speaking on the transition from adolescence to adulthood and nostalgia for the innocence of childhood. They touch on adolescent insecurity and address millennial angst while discussing relatable life challenges. → Tyler Joseph was in his mid-20s at time of the single's release, performing a nostalgic "ode to the innocence of childhood" with lyrics speaking on the transition from adolescence to adulthood, adolescent insecurity, and millennial angst. He is speaking as a member of generation engulfed in college loan debt and sharing their anxieties while feigning apathy and yearning peer acceptance all over social media.

I think we should move this sentence at the bottom as a legacy interpretation; not directly about the lyrics, but how people who listen to them interpret and relate to "Stressed Out". His poignant lyrics convey a narrative illustrating young men who discover that life as an adult is plagued with issues. → Forbes called "Stressed Out" as an anthem for a millennial generation of a young man who has been discovering in mid 2010s that life as an adult is plagued with issues.

I think you should add a note after—"The song closes with an outro where external voices suggest the need to wake up because they need to make money"— explaining that the music video for "Stressed Out" ends with the chant that brings up the same idea. Since the music video section is below this one, and without the video this interpretation seems to be stretched.

This ones can placed at the end of the section as a separate paragraph, complimenting the talk about lyrics and themes, but aren't directly about the interpretation of the lyrics: For a time, record producer Mike Elizondo was worried Joseph's specificity would limit the single's reception among the larger populace.[1] In retrospect, Elizondo said, "We can all kind of relate to wanting to have more of those simpler days. I think he nailed it; though the lyrical content is very specific to him, the listener is able to impose their own story onto it. That type of feeling will never go away." During the promotion of their forthcoming studio album, Joseph began wearing black paint in every video and live performance.

Critical reception

WIP: I think you should put all the contemporary reviews that praise the instrumentals in one corner; and all the reviews that praise the lyrics in another. More focused, not just quote islands loosely connecting into these two ideas. I can elaborate.

Lead

WIP

Pics

"Background" mentions Joseph wearing Blurryface makeup during tour. Can we add a good picture of him with this makeup?

  • Link-despenser flags some of the link as potentially broken. Some of the flagged links work. This, this, this, this, this, this, this, and [2] doesn't work for me. You should check and archie them if they also doesn't work for you (some websites doesn't work in my country, but probably work fine in most of the other countries). I think there is a convenient tool to mass archive pages, but forgot the name :).
    • I'm worried that google play is a problematic source, since we linking to a promotional page where people can buy stuff. However, it isn't officially marked as unreliable, and searching through "Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Archive", I couldn't find any relevant discussions.
  • All sources are reliable per WP:A/C. Checked some of them gor verifiability. checkY
  • You should translate the title for 6th ref, adding "trans-title=" for English title and "language=it".
Allikas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Stressed_Out
No tags for this post.