Talk:Drunk on Love (Rihanna song)/GA1

GA Review

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.

---

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

Reviewer: Hahc21 (talk · contribs) 06:04, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi all. I'll be starting the review by Thursday May 10, 2012.

Finish Bad Girl (Rihanna song) first please. Aaron • ^{You Da One}

Don't worry. I'm almost ready with it. That's why i chose this. =) --Hahc21 (talk) 11:41, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Review Start

Ok, i have finished Bad Girl, so i think we can start with this one. I'll be reviewing it on the next 7 days per my own 7-day review process.

Day 1

1. Dashboard: Major contributors have been advised on their respective talk pages about the review process.
   
2. Disambiguation links: The article is clean of disambiguation links.
   
3. References: All references are OK. None of them is dead or suspicious.
   
4. Major issues: Major issues do not appear in the article.
   
5. Original research: Issues regarding high amounts of original research do not exist.
   
6. Lead section:There is one reference that should not be on the lead, and is already included in the composition section. It might be removed. The lead properly summarizes all information contained in the article body without going into detail. Good.
   
7. Article structure: All sections mandatory for a song article are weel positioned and detailed. the See also section is missing. Also, some categories that should be there are missing either, like the 2011 songs category. Images and the sample are very well done. --Hahc21 (talk) 21:04, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Day 2

• Day 2: Scanning day. This day i make what i call scanning. I scan the article from top to bottom to identify minor issues.

• Scan for uncorrectly used references.

1. The album's booklet says Rihanna recorded most of Talk That Talk songs during ther Loud Tour?

1. No. But she recorded it throughout the tour. Aaron • ^{You Da One}
2. is there any ref that supports it? I men, i know she recorded the entire Talk That Talk album while on tour, but, you know, we need to put a reference :(. --Hahc21 (talk) 17:12, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

1. Added a source. Aaron • ^{You Da One}

1. On the references supporting the "indie, europop and trance" statement, i searched ref #3 without finding the "indie" word on the section dedicated to the song. I'll read it again to see if i missed it.

1. Okay. Aaron • ^{You Da One}
2. Ok, i found the indie reference! it is well hidden XD. --Hahc21 (talk) 17:12, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

• Scan for original research

1. There is no original research. If the "indie" word is correctly sourced. I'll be checking it in again.

1. Checked. --Hahc21 (talk) 17:12, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

• Scan for verifiability of sources.

1. I have my doubts about the DesiHits website. Is it really a good source?
2. I think so lol. Aaron • ^{You Da One}
3. For now, the DesiHits ref can stay. As i've seen on the Wikipedia article for the website, it is notable. It has appeared on Reuters, Business Week and Vanity Fair. --Hahc21 (talk) 17:12, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

• Scan for grammar, spelling, and other syntax and semantic elements.

1. On the critical reception section, there's a statement which says: "He was praised Rihanna's vocal performance", should't it be "He praised Rihanna's vocal performance"?

--Hahc21 (talk) 03:06, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

1. Oops Lol. Aaron • ^{You Da One}

Round 2

Ok, some little things before the verdict.

1. Could it be possible to write a see also section?

Nothing else. --Hahc21 (talk) 17:12, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Day 3

Day 3: Feedback day. After searching and scanning, the day 3 is crutial In this day, all issues that arose on the other two days are presented to the collaborators od the article to be fixed.

• Ok. Now i need to wait until calvin999 (talk · contribs) fixes all the minor issues to continue with the review. I'm not putting this on hold since the fixes are minor. --Hahc21 (talk) 15:59, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Day 4

Ok, everything has been addressed. So, i'll give my final verdict.

Verdict

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose):
   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references):
   b (citations to reliable sources):
   c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects):
   b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Final comments: Only minor issues arose on the review. Calvin is very good on writing articles with GA quality. At the end, as it's only a song that has yet to be released as a single, it meets the criteria. --Hahc21 (talk) 17:57, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks :). Aaron • ^{You Da One} 00:24, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

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.