Talk:Illuminati (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.

---

Reviewer: Carbrera (talk · contribs) 13:28, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I am Carbrera, and I'll be reviewing this article for possible good article submission.

Full review coming very soon. Carbrera (talk) 13:28, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

REVIEW:

Infobox

• What's the 'Use mdy dates' all about? I'm not familiar with this hidden template; what a great way to start off a review! :)
• Remove 'flatlist' from the genre; you don't need it if you're only listing one genre

Lead

Paragraph 1

• I know iTunes store is a proper noun, so it shouldn't have a 'the' in front of it, but I think it may sound more clear if there were; not a big deal

Paragraph 2

• The proper lyric is "It's like everybody in this party['s] shining like Illuminati"
• You can add the years (2015 and 2016) to the beginning of 'Rebel Heart Tour', if you'd like; it's not necessary though

Background and release

Paragraph 1

• Flow would be better if you added 'several' in between 'enlisted' and 'collaborators' in the first sentence
• Insert a comma in between 'singing' and 'laughing' in the Instagram quote

Paragraph 2

• Avoid SHOUTING in source #4
• Add 'a' before "pre-order for the album on iTunes Store on December 20, 2014, as an "early Christmas gift."

Composition and lyrics

Paragraph 1

Well written; nothing to add :)

Paragraph 2

Also very well written; I am impressed

Critical reception

Paragraph 1

Nada.

Paragraph 2

Nothing as well; Good job IndianBio, and of course the other contributors!

Paragraph 3

• If you wanted, I would add a word like 'similarly' or along that before the line: "Evan Sawdey of PopMatters said..."

Live performance

Paragraph 1

• I feel like the caption for the picture could be changed to "Madonna performing 'Illuminati' during the Rebel Heart Tour in Washington, D.C. in September 2015"

Paragraph 2

• You could probably add how the live performance by the dancers was acclaimed by critics.

Credits and personnel

Perfect!

Charts

I double-checked and you did have all of the chart positions mentioned, so nothing to add here.

References

• 1 - Link Idolator
• 9 - Unlink Rolling Stone (you only need one link)
• 19 - Unlink Rolling Stone (same as above)
• 29 - Forgot the 't' in 'Rebel Hear[t]
• 30 - Unlink New York Daily News (you only need one link)
• 34 - Unlink Rolling Stone (same as above)

External links

• Change the category from 2015 songs to 2014 songs, since it was officially released in 2014

End of GA Review:

Wow. I am very impressed with the effort put into this article. Expertly written with very few mistakes, I see no reason why this couldn't be a GA article. Definitely fix the mistakes and take any of my suggestions into consideration, but I see nothing major (or relatively minor for that matter) wrong with the article. Thanks IndianBio! Carbrera (talk) 02:59, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

GA

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

But Carbrera, this passing could have waited until I addressed the comments? There was no rush to pass it. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 09:15, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

I agree, but this article is excellent and I had no doubt in my mind that you would immediately make any changes for the better of the article. The few mistakes j noticed were EXTREMELY minor and did not effect the article's content as a whole. If the article had many more mistakes, I would have definitely put it on hold but I saw no need to do that. Carbrera (talk) 13:22, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I addressed all the comments anyways. However for your future reviews don't pass it before the nominator addresses them because it is frowned upon, just saying this. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 13:28, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. Carbrera (talk) 13:30, 3 March 2016 (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.