Talk:Criminal (Britney Spears song)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Grandiose (talk · contribs) 11:26, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Generally very good, as I expected. A few small things:

Images are fine (I accept the FURs); however, the captions could do with more focus on the image and less on the accompanying text (particularly the Rhianna one)
It's the same thing as the We Found Love music video article and several others, no need to change it. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 20:48, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, WP:CAPTION advises against, which is linked as part of criterion 6. However I dn't feel particularly strongly, but I am surprised previous reviewers didn't mention it.
But WP:CAPTION clearly states, "Different people read articles different ways. ... For those readers, even if the information is adjacent in the text, they will not find it unless it is in the caption". I don't really know how to write another better caption, since "Rihanna performing at the V Festival. Her music video for we found love..." would be not only too big, but it wouldn't make sense regarding the section's context. Do you have any ideas on how this can be re-written? - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 02:59, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The italics on "just once" must be an addition and I don't think they're warranted as emphasis. In fact there are a few uses which need closer consideration.
The phrase from the source is exactly like this, the reviewer emphasized it. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 20:48, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Some spaced em-dashes are present. They should either be spaced en-dashes or unspaced em-dashes (not really a GA thing but I imagine you might want to take this on).
"Radio Mix": why the capitals?
Why not? It is the remix title. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 20:48, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Radio mix" is just a generic title for a radio edit, no? You've put The Radio Mix of "Criminal", not "Criminal (Radio Mix)" which would suggest you're using it in a generic way as well.
Fixed - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 02:59, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ref #88, I assume something's wrong there
Fixed - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 20:48, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The "Critical reception" section is a bit of a list. Were you going with a theme per paragraph?
I could paraphrase it more if you few like it's needed. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 20:48, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's not the paraphrasing, it's identifying a flow. How does the content of each paragraph differ?
It doesn't. I have shortened it to two paragraphs just so the visual of the page can look better. Or is it needed to be on huge paragraph with all those reviews? - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 02:59, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(Oh, and the previous abandoned review: I assume there were no outstanding comments?)
I don't think the other reviewer even started it. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 20:48, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Placing article on hold, I'd hope to get this wrapped up quickly. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 11:26, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but I have a couple problems with the article, particularly the references. There is a random ] in the second reference. Ref. 10 and 125 are the same website but have a different publisher format, plus all the citations from 99 to 124 need proper publishers. There is inconsistency with date formats (i.e January 1, 1901 or 1901-01-01). And what makes this a reliable source? Till 14:02, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't say that "proper publishers" were GA criteria, in the sense that enough material is provided for verifiability at the moment, nor is date consistency. However the other things need looking at (thanks Till). Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 14:17, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
SameSame is run by and a part of Sound Alliance, "an insight driven strategic and creative agency focused on effective digital, experiential and promotional work." The company works with several others such as Last.fm, Pitchfork, Hypem Machine, and more. I think this is realiable enough. And the references issues you've addressed were fixed. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 20:48, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Seems pretty good. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 21:20, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The SameSame source isn't reliable. It was written by a user of the website. Till 01:52, 16 June 2012 (UTC
Removed - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 02:59, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay good. All my concerns have been addressed. Till 04:53, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't find anything else to say, so passing. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 10:49, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]