Talk:California King Bed/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 05:07, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Infobox

• Include all four genres from "Background, release and composition"

Lead

• The song was released as the album's fifth single on May 13, 2011 through The Island Def Jam Music Group. – It says in the infobox the label is Def Jam
• ...which incorporates elements of Rock. – "Rock" does not need to be capitalized

Background, release and composition

• No issues

Critical reception

• However, Andy Kellman of AllMusic... – Change to "Allmusic"

Chart performance

• In the United States... – Do not wiki-link "United States"
• ...ending June 4, 2011 at number eighty on the US Billboard Hot 100.[25] and... – Remove period before [25]

Music video

• The music video for "California King Bed" was shot in March 2011[28] and directed Anthony Mandler... – "...and was directed by Anthony Mandler..."
• ...fabricated a custom made 18 foot long bed... – Change "18" to "eighteen"
• The video premiered Monday, May 9, 2011 on her official website Rihannanow.com and VEVO.[33] – Should belong in "Background" subsection

Live performances

• ...at the ACM Awards held by Academy of Country Music... – "...held by the Academy of Country Music..."
• ...including Hamburg in Germany, Milan in Italy and Paris in France. – You do not need to specify countries of cities because the cities explain that in their respective articles

Track listing

• No issues
• Change to Formats and track listings. Jivesh • Talk2Me 18:13, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Credits and personnel

• No issues

Charts and certifications

• No issues

Radio and release history

• No issues

References

• Reference 16 – Change "AllMusic" to "Allmusic"
• Reference 17 – Fix publisher wiki-link
• References 19, 69 – "Australian Recording Industry Association" does not need wiki-linking because it is already in Reference 18
• References 22, 70 – "Recording Industry Association of New Zealand" does not need wiki-linking because it was already linked in Reference 20; fix reference access date
• Reference 26 – Archive not needed in this source
• Reference 27 – "work=" parameter not needed; publisher is Yahoo! Music
• References 28, 40, 41 – Change "Rap Up" to "Rap-Up"
• Reference 31 – Publisher does not need to be wiki-linked because it already occurred in section
• Reference 37 – "MTV" should not be italicized
• Reference 38 – "Billboard" does not need to be wiki-linked per above
• Reference 68 – "The Official Charts Company" does not need to be wiki-linked per above

  I can't change this one for some reason, it is a pre-linked written source. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• Reference 71 – "The Music Network" is not a print source and should not be italicized
• References 72, 73, 74, 75, 79 – Change to "iTunes Store" and "Apple Inc."

Non-reviewer comments concerning formatting of referencesby Jivesh • Talk2Me 18

08, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

• 3: You forgot to add Digital Spy as the work. Note that it should not be italicized.
• 4: Same as #3.

  Erm, no, if you of clicked on Edit, you would have seen that Digital Spy is in fact there on 3 and 4, but had been listed as publisher and not work. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• 7: parameters work, publisher and author are all missing.

  No, the work was there, but it had been spelt wrong, and the publisher is there as well...it clearly says "David Hunke" Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• 11: Pitchfork Media should not be italicized + where is the publisher?

  What do you mean where is the publisher? It clearly says publisher=Pitchfork. You should click on edit before you comment saying something is wrong Jivesh. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• 13: Never use block letters for title when you intend to promote an article to GA + PopCrush is not a newspaper, so it should not be italicized as well.
• 16: Publisher should only be Rovi Corporation.
• 17: NME should be italicized.
• 21: "charts.ord.nz" should not be italicized.
• 27: Yahoo! Music should not be italicized.

  It's not? Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• 28,30: Publisher is Devin Lazerine.
• 31: Publisher is Lynne Segall.
• 33: Publisher is PopDust.
• 34: parameters work, publisher and author are all missing.

  There is no author for this article. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• 35: parameters work, publisher and author are all missing.
• 36: Publisher is [[MTV News]]. [[MTV Networks]].
• 37: Same as 36.

  There's nothing wrong at all with 37. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• 40,41: Publisher is Devin Lazerine + Never use block letters for title when you intend to promote an article to GA

  40 was not in capitals. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• 42: parameters work and author are all missing.

  What? The work parameter is there Jivesh, and there is no author. If you would check and click edit first, then you would have seen it. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• 44: Publisher is Jann Wenner.

  Again, it said that in the reference, but it was stylised as Jann Wenner|Wenner Media. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• 45. Publisher is [[iTunes Store]] (Netherlands). [[Apple Inc.]].
• 47: No format???

  it is formatted... Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

• 61,62,63: Sloppy formatting. Work? Publisher?
• 67,68: Accessdates missing.

Calvin, your weak point appears to be formatting of references. Frankly telling you, when formatting of references have so many issues, the GAN should be failed immediately. You are lucky to have a patient reviewer. Jivesh • Talk2Me 18:08, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

One more thing, (just asking), isn't there more information to expand the article? Especially composition, background and reception for the music video? Jivesh • Talk2Me 18:11, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

You were very lucky with Work It Out as well because the prose was very bad. But it's swings and roundabouts, it took me about 3 minutes to sort out the references, why should something be failed when it only takes a few minutes to correct and there is only a handful of other points in the entire article? And no, there isn't, it's wasn't a massive single, by time you get to the sixth single from an album, less and less information becomes available, and people write about brand new and more current releases. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 18:22, 8 August 2011 (UTC) Btw, I hadn't seen that you had also made comments about the references. Some of them Jivesh were fine and were not actually missing parameters and had been spelt wrong, so they were actually there. If you want to start doing reviews, you must click edit to fully see the reference, as you were wrong on quite a few. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 18:55, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Overall review

After reviewing this article thoroughly, I have decided to put the article on hold at this time. This is a very good article that is close to reaching good article status. However, there are many minor mistakes which are affecting the prose quality of the article as well as the "References" section, which has many minor mistakes. I will give you the general seven days to fix these mistakes and/or discuss the items you believe do not affect good article status until a consensus is reached. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask. Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 17:14, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Have done everything! Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 17:55, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Since all of the issues have been addressed, I feel confident passing this article. Congratulations and keep up the good work! Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 21:19, 8 August 2011 (UTC)