Talk:MDNA (album)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Mike Christie (talk · contribs) 20:28, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

I'll review this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:28, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

I'll copyedit as I go through; please revert as needed.

• Footnote 124 is a dead link.
• [1] is not dead, but I don't see any actual information on that page. It looks like one would have had to click "Show", and of course that doesn't work on archive.org.
• Footnote 181 has no title parameter.
• What makes the following sites reliable? I'm not saying they're not; I'm just not familiar with them and couldn't see evidence on their websites.
  • idolator.com
  • popjustice.com
  • anydecentmusic.com
• Recording became a natural process: what does "natural" mean here? I think this means it went smoothly; "natural" usually gets used with a verb of emotion such as "feel" when that's the intended meaning. I think this would be rephrased; either "Recording felt natural [(or) like a natural process] for all parties" or "Recording went smoothly", without the "for all parties involved. The latter seems more fluent to me.
• You use both past tense ("MDNA consisted of") and present tense ("the record explores"); it should be consistent throughout the article.
• thus facing negative reception from anti-drug groups: "thus" implies a logical deduction, rather than a common sense one; and the effect was to provoke the response, not to face the response. How about "alludes to the drug MDMA, which drew a negative reception from anti-drug groups". Or recast the whole sentence: "The album's title is a triple-entendre; its allusion to MDMA drew...". Looking further below you only cite one group who commented, so we'd have to make it "group", not "groups", if no others reacted in the same way.
• multi faceted deal: what does this mean?
• I'm confused by the reference to two separate record deals; does the record fall into both the Live Nation and the Interscope deal in some way?
• I'd suggest limiting the list of countries in the last paragraph of the lead; knowing that the album reached #1 in Finland and Scotland isn't the sort of thing that needs to be in the lead. I'd make it "in at least X countries", and include two or three of the biggest markets, whichever those are.
• Madonna knew that he would align with her current musical choices: saying "Madonna knew" puts the rest of the sentence on Wikipedia's voice; I'd make the verb "felt" or "believed" instead.
• They also enjoyed the time spent there and give proper attention to the songs, which was the reason that moved on beyond recording just one song: ungrammatical.
• With Orbit's production style, Madonna found that her European sensibilities was in line with that of the producer, which suited the songs being composed: should be "were", not "was", but how about shortening this a bit: "Madonna found that her European sensibilities were in line with Orbit's, which suited the songs being composed"?
• The sessions with Orbit were "incredibly quick and spontaneous" since both of them were committed to the record: this is a non sequitur.
• so there was a prevalent shyness in her communication: not very naturally phrased. Can we just say "she was shy", or "found herself reluctant to communicate with them"?
• they were able to overcome the challenge in lieu of the music being composed: "in lieu" means "instead of", or "in place of", which I'm pretty sure is not what's intended here.
• The music composed could be divided into two categories: if this is still Madonna's opinion, like the previous sentence, we should continue the attribution.
• The sinister lyrics: "sinister" should be cut or attributed.
• I'd cut "fifth track", "tenth track", and so on; they make the prose feel even more list-like than it has to be anyway, and there's a track listing in the article if the reader wants to check it. You use the occasional "next track", and you could maybe vary it with "following track".
• asking the listener to stop and relax by listening to music: this is opinion, so we need to attribute it.
• Lourdes had come to the recording studio and agreed to give background vocals on the track: why do we need this sentence? Doesn't it just repeat the previous sentence?
• highlights the main virtues of Madonna: again we don't want this in Wikipedia's voice.
• A 1960s inspired rock and roll and country music form the backbone of: Looks like a noun got left out?
• Its lyrics mention analogies of sin, culminating in a verse where Madonna namesakes different saints and their virtues: I don't know what "mention analogies of sin" means, and "namesake" is a noun, not a verb. Are you thinking of "namecheck"? I think you could go with just "names".
• The song has minimal production from strings, guitars and prominent percussion: what does it mean to say a song has production from an instrument?
• Madonna takes ownership of the reasons her marriage failed: this needs attribution.
• a goof off tune: needs attribution.
• it was voted as the most anticipated album of 2012 winning the poll by gaining 42% of the votes: suggest cutting to "it was voted as the most anticipated album of 2012"; the percentage is a trivia fact.
• The show was visualized by Cirque Du Soleil: I'd suggest using a different verb: using "visualize" to mean "envision and design the visual aspects of", which I think is what you mean here, is jargony.
• Why do we get the Italian release date for "Turn Up the Radio"? And the Brazilian release date for "Superstar"? If these are relevant because they're the first world-wide release dates for those songs, I'd say so.
• It played in different venues like stadiums and arenas, as well as outdoor locations like the Plains of Abraham in Quebec": suggest "It played in outdoor locations like the Plains of Abraham in Quebec as well as in stadiums and arenas", but it seems like cuttable trivia to me -- what major tour doesn't play in these sorts of locations?
• launched an opportunity for its listeners: suggest "gave its listeners an opportunity".
• who felt that the singer outdid on the Orbit-produced tracks: "outdid" requires a direct object.
• making Madonna cater to the contemporary songs: what does this mean?
• "all those reminders of her work ethic [in the song 'I Don't Give A' can feel exhausting": looks like an incomplete [bracketed note]?
• MDNA received the largest number of pre-ordered booking of the album on the iTunes Store after its release: needs some qualification; most ever? Most to that point?
• Suggest cutting the picture of Presley; the connection to the article is peripheral.
• To date, the album has sold: needs an "as of" date.
• With MDNA reaching number one on the UK Albums Chart, Madonna was listed in the Guinness World Records book for this achievement: what exactly did they list it for?

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:01, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

IndianBio: just checking you're still planning to work on this article. If I don't hear from you I will fail the article in another week. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:13, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

• IndianBio has been absent from Wikipedia for a significant amount of time so I would think you could fail this due to that. Sorry for interrupt this review. Just wanted to let you know. Aoba47 (talk) 20:53, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

  You're probably right, but I'll let it go for the week I promised, just in case they suddenly reappear. I did once get a surprise response from a nominator who'd been gone for months, but only once. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:11, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

  No response, so I am failing this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:32, 24 February 2018 (UTC)