Talk:Love Me (The 1975 song)/GA1

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

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

Reviewer: SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 16:04, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Taking this review. I should have initial comments up within a week. Otherwise, give me a ping. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 16:04, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Here's what I have to say for the infobox and lead:

Infobox

• Let's provide a source URL for File:Love Me The 1975.jpg as that will make it easier to prove authenticity  Done

Lead

• The use of "post-ironic" comes off as editorializing, so I'd opt for something else
• Unlink "contemporary music critics" per WP:OVERLINK
• "Praise was directed at" → "Reviewers praised"

More to follow in the future. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 02:58, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Background and release

• I'm not seeing anything here on the commercial sucess of the band's first album, and let's link The 1975 (album) to "eponymous debut studio album" instead of just "eponymous"
• Chart details for the band's first album are better for that article
• Unlink single per WP:OVERLINK
• "released a ten-day countdown"..... started or began would be a more appropriate verb

I'll get to "Development" later on. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 01:56, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Development

• File:TrevorHornBuggles1980.png feels decorative when Horn didn't contribute any writing, production, or vocals
• Let's be more specific and say the track was written two years before getting released; saying "created" can give an impression it was also recorded during that time (which isn't something I could find like the writing details)
• "composed in a traditional manner"..... don't assume readers will now what this tradition refers to, and same goes for "forward-thinking" from "the forward-thinking and dramatic nature"

Not much wrong here :). SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 00:39, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Music and lyrics

• When the duration for this track is 3 minute and 42 seconds (equal to 222 seconds), File:The 1975 - Love Me.ogg exceeds the limits allowed at WP:SAMPLE, which says it should be 10% or less of a song's total length (with 30 seconds being the absolute maximum ever permitted). It needs to be 22 seconds or shorter (currently at 23).
• Link selfie from "selfie culture"
• "In the verse first" doesn't read very well, and I'm guessing you meant to say first verse

• Lol, whoops. Giacobbe ^talk 13:13, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

• PopMatters doesn't use 2013 for the "post-Random Access Memories" description, and I don't see how that year would be relevant anyway

• I thought we always list the release date for an album in prose? I have no problem removing if I'm mistaken! Giacobbe ^talk 13:13, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

• When it pertains to discussing multiple works by the same person/group, maybe, but I'd say no in this instance. That's now gone. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 19:43, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

• "writing it feels self-conscious and self-effacing rather than plagiarism" is sugarcoating how Consequence of Sound straight-up called the track "instances of plagiarism" for similarities to Bowie and Isley Brothers.

More for you to work with. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 03:49, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Critical reception

• Remove the italics from the captions for File:David Bowie Chile.jpg and File:Prince by jimieye.jpg. I'll assume good faith that the Bowie pic is the uploader's own work as claimed when no evidence suggests otherwise. As for Prince, while it's free of copyright, I recommend using something else because the lighting gives a poor view of his face.
• To avoid WP:SYNTH, let's add a ref to back up "Upon release, 'Love Me' was met with positive reviews from contemporary music critics." One shouldn't make presumptions about overall reception solely based on what's included within article text when that can fail to factor in other opinions that haven't been mentioned.

• I'd argue that the statement falls under NOTJUSTANYSYNTH or SYNTH is not summary, but in this case there's enough material to make the point itself. Giacobbe ^talk 17:32, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

• The "rockstar" from "rockstar growl" is missing a hyphen
• Is Music Feeds a trustworthy publication? I'm not very familiar with it. Either way, it uses a space for "ear worm".

• Yes, Music Feeds is an Australian magazine. Giacobbe ^talk 13:34, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

• I'd put "fun" in quotation marks for the "fun nature" bit
• While I realize that Consequence of Sound uses italics for emphasis, that's best avoided here when Wiki articles should reserve that for titles of works like albums, movies, TV shows, books, video games, magazines, and newspapers.
• Let's specify that musicOMH calls the chorus "bold"

We're getting closer to the finish :). SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 23:46, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Commercial performance

• While I see where you're coming from with the "performed modestly" bit, it's best to let the numbers speak for themselves, and such descriptions are often contested.
• You appear to have the wrong URL for the UK; I found a number 20 debut here (and it looks like that was its peak after four weeks on the chart)

• Thanks! Giacobbe ^talk 17:14, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

• I'm not seeing any mention of the song within this. It's clearly not the right link for Ireland when dated to a time before the song was even released and the parent album wasn't out yet. In reality, "Love Me" opened at number 40 there for the week ending 23-Oct-2015 (choose the "16-Oct-15" date in its filters to find that).

• Thank you! Giacobbe ^talk 17:15, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

• "Billboard" should be part of the text linked to Billboard Hot 100

After I get through "Music video", the rest should be a breeze! SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 00:17, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Music video

Background and release

• Since "sexy" can sound opinionated, let's put "sexy daze" in quotation marks

Synonpsis

• The use of File:The 1975 - Love Me Video.jpg seems justified per WP:NFCC#8
• Cut the "iconic" puffery from "Richey Edwards' iconic NME cover photo"

Critical reception Response

• Maybe you could retitle this to "response" only so it doesn't lead to confusion/technical issues with a previous "Critical reception" section? I'm also fine with renaming the other one instead.
• Not sure whether "Coup de Main" should have italics, but either way, remove those from Digital Spy.

• Coup de Main is a magazine, so italics are okay. Giacobbe ^talk 13:44, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

• In that case, I added those myself. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 19:43, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

• Is "noted" the best verb within "Murphy noted the visual"? I'd recommend "wrote", "said", "stated", or something along those lines.

Nearly there! I expect to get everything else in one go. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 03:36, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Credits and personnel

• Flawless!

Charts

• "2015–16" should be "2015–2016" when four digits is preferable for years as more complete and professional looking than two digits
• See my previous comments on Ireland and the UK

Certifications

• Perfect!

References

• See above comment on Music Feeds

External links

• Nothing of concern!

Overall

• Prose: Needs some touching up
• Referencing: Not everything is properly verified
• Coverage: Looks good
• Neutrality: Without any quotation marks for the "fun" part, it comes off as opinionated
• Stability: This is A-OK
• Media: One subpar image, and captions should be adjusted
• Verdict: The nomination is being placed on hold for seven days starting now. Hopefully my remaining points can be addressed within that timeframe. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 21:47, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

• @SNUGGUMS: I think I've addressed and/or corrected everything that was brought up. Let me know if there's anything I've missed! Thank you again for another great review my friend ! Giacobbe ^talk 17:34, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

• You're very welcome :). I just made a couple minor changes myself, and since File:Prince at Coachella (cropped).jpg has no problems whatsoever, this is now good enough to pass! SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 19:43, 29 April 2021 (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.