Talk:Mr.Mr. (song)/GA1

Latest comment: 8 years ago by MarioSoulTruthFan in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: MarioSoulTruthFan (talk · contribs) 11:28, 27 May 2016 (UTC)Reply


Hello, I'm User:MarioSoulTruthFan and I will be reviewing this article. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 11:28, 27 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Infobox

edit

No art cover?

Comment: In South Korea, singles are meant to be songs that are promoted as the title track of an album. They are not released for sale separately, so most of them don't have their own covers (or the album covers are used simultaneously for both the album and title track).

I wasn't aware of that. Thank you for the enlightenment. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 10:45, 1 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Lead

edit
  • Fine

Background and composition

edit
  • mixed a hip hop beat and EDM-inspired buildups → this needs quotes.
  •   Done

Promotion

edit
  • "It was the second most watched K-op" → K-pop and wikilink.
  •   Done

Critical reception

edit
  • "He further named it the 18th best K-pop song of 2014 on his list of 20 Best K-Pop Songs of the year, elaborating that despite the fact that "Mr.Mr." was less "jarring" than the group's 2013 single "I Got a Boy", the former was still "infused with musical subtleties". → This sentence is too big, needs full stop. Example given: He further named it the 18th best K-pop song of 2014 on his list of 20 Best K-Pop Songs of the year. Benjamin elaborated that despite the fact that "Mr.Mr." was less "jarring" than the group's 2013 single "I Got a Boy", the former was still "infused with musical subtleties".
  • "Time magazine's journalist Lily Rothman included "Mr.Mr." on their list of 25 Best Songs of 2014 (So Far) in June, writing that "Fans [...] won’t be disappointed by their latest dance-friendly single" and further elaborating that "the addition of a scratchy electronic bass line and a hint of darkness" should attract listeners who were not used to their signature bubblegum pop sound". → same as previous.
Comment: Revised the second part, but I think the first part sounds fine the way that it is?

Never said it didn't sound fine, just needs a full stop as a casual reader there is so much information I can take at a certain rate, not having a full stop in there doesn't allow me that. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 10:53, 1 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

  •   Done

Commercial performance

edit
  • Fine.

Credits

edit
  • Link The Underdogs.
  •   Done

Charts

edit

Weekly charts

edit
  • Use single chart table for the billboard charts.
Comment: I checked, but could not find the template for K-pop Hot 100 and World Digital, this might not be applicable.

I actually I have not seen those as well, so leave it at that.   Done.

Year-end charts

edit
  • Fine.

Release history

edit
  • Fine.

References

edit
  • Ref 8. → two authors: Jeff Benjamin and Jessica Oak, you only "cite" the former.
  •   Done
  • Ref 4, 10 and 19 don't have work while the others do have work. Fix that
  •   Done
edit
  • Add the external reference for the lyrics provided by metro lyrics.
  •   Done

Overall GA review

edit
  • Almost flawless article. Fix the issues I have raised and it will be promoted. I will put it on hold. Good work.
  • On a side note, it's better if you archive all the links in the article, not mandatory is just a suggestion. You can use webcitation or waybackmachine. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 12:13, 27 May 2016 (UTC)Reply
Comment: I'll make sure to archive the links later. Let me know if anything else needs to be fixed. Thank you.--TerryAlex (talk) 20:59, 31 May 2016 (UTC)Reply
@TerryAlex: I have found another issue regarding the references, please address that and I left another comment on the Critical reception section. Thank you. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 10:55, 1 June 2016 (UTC)Reply
@MarioSoulTruthFan:, thank you so much for the review. Is everything good to go now? Thank you.--TerryAlex (talk) 14:24, 1 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

@TerryAlex: perhaps I wasn't clear the references I cited above don't have work, but they did have publisher that you changed for work, which is not the same. They need both, as most of the refs have both (work and publisher), so revert your edits on the references and add the publisher. Once addressed that task this will be GA material. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 16:09, 1 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

@MarioSoulTruthFan:, I added the publisher for Osen sources (Money Today, which is a national South Korean newspaper). Newsis is an independent news agency, so they are both "work" and "publisher". Thank you.--TerryAlex (talk) 19:20, 1 June 2016 (UTC)Reply
@TerryAlex: Gladly passing now congrats to you and Simon. I can't stress enough, but archive the links, first look for them on waybackmachine, it will be easier. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 20:51, 1 June 2016 (UTC)Reply