Talk:Pretty Hurts/GA1
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Lips Are Movin (talk · contribs) 21:11, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
A superb article, though the prose needs a lot of work before this can be awarded a GA icon.
Infobox
editExtended content
|
---|
Everything else is great. |
Lead
editExtended content
|
---|
|
Background and recording
editExtended content
|
---|
|
Composition
editExtended content
|
---|
|
Critical reception
editI have copyedited this section myself and it is now up to standard.- Lips are movin 13:26, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
Commercial performance
edit@My love is love: I have copyedited this section myself. Before I continue with the lengthy music video section and the rest of the article, I would suggest you address all my above concerns and then read through the rest of the article word-for-word, and edit accordingly.- Lips are movin 15:30, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- @Lips Are Movin: I think that this review should have resulted with a fail in the first place since you have remarks for each sentence in the article. I addressed some of your comments about the lead but I decide to withdraw the nomination. I Am... ***D.D. 18:42, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- @My love is love: This article has been up for GAN for so long, and it's really up to standard coverage-wise for GA. I'd hate for you to withdraw tbh! I'd be more than happy to do some copyediting if you're still interested! - Lips are movin 18:51, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- MLIL, Please don't give up. The article looks great! I agree, it can be frustrating when someone spends more time explaining changes that should be made rather than just making the changes on their own. However, that is up to the reviewer, and it looks like User:Lips Are Movin is willing to help. As am I if necessary. You are so close! :) ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:03, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you guys for your motivational words. I will do the improvements over the next two days. I Am... ***D.D. 19:17, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Fab :) I can see you've put in a lot of effort in the article and it's visible in its good coverage. And I hate to sound nitpicky but as a reviewer, it is visible to me that the prose, neutrality and some referencing is the only issue it has, so I'll gladly help with a quick copyedit of the article when I have time to lessen the load of points I'm proposing.- Lips are movin 20:51, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- Lips, thank you for being willing to help out. In no way do I mean to dictate this process, but I do hope MLIL takes some time to review the changes made by Lips, just so there is agreement. Barnstars for both of you once the article is promoted to Good article status, because I appreciate how you two are working together and making Wikipedia a better project. ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:53, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Final concerns
editThanks @Another Believer: :) I've finished copyediting the article @My love is love:, please feel free to check and change what you agree and disagree with. The only other concerns I have are the following:
- I'm a bit confused and probably incorrectly copyedited the line in the music video's development section regarding Beyonce's youth footage and "Ghost".
- Most of the references don't contain publishers.
- Publishers were deliberately omitted (as in Beyoncé (album)). I Am... ***D.D. 20:13, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
- Some of the references are linked more than once.
- I cannot find such references, can you please point them out? I Am... ***D.D. 20:15, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
- The charts section doesn't contain Template:Singlechart which seems to be the WP:MoS for song articles and could result in WP:LINKROT in future.
- Not using the template doesn't cause linkrot. See FA Rehab (Rihanna song). MaRAno FAN 11:56, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- The template is there for a reason, and is WP:MOS for song articles, irregardless of whatever random dated FA. - Lips are movin 12:41, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- It would be beneficial if all images contained WP:ALT.
- A detailed fair-use rationale needs to be added for the single artwork and sample. The rationales on Beyonce (album) would prove useful in this case.
On hold Once these concerns are addressed and MLIL is happy with the prose that I've copyedited this should be A and away for GA! :) - Lips are movin 18:41, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Lips Are Movin: I don't mean to be rude. But this article has been on hold for more than 10 days. You need to pass or fail this immediately MaRAno FAN 09:44, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- @MaranoFan: the article has been a GAN for more than 6 months, I felt it was only fair to give the nominator some time to respond as he/she has waited this long for it to be reviewed. It seems the reviewer has become unactive lately, unless @Another Believer: would like to address the concern, I will have to fail this unfortunately. - Lips are movin 11:29, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- MaranoFan, why the demand? Personally, I would prefer Lips Are Movin to decide when it is best to pass or fail the nomination. If you look at the nominator's edit history, you will see breaks between editing sessions. I don't see anything wrong with that and would prefer to give the nominator more time to address these final concerns, but at the same time I recognize that the decision is not mine to make. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:11, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Another Believer: An article is generally placed on hold for 7 days. The time may be extended if work to address the concerns is going on. Honestly speaking, I don't think that any such work is being done. It would be good to close this before a bot archives this as an abandoned review. MaRAno FAN 08:01, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
- MaranoFan, why the demand? Personally, I would prefer Lips Are Movin to decide when it is best to pass or fail the nomination. If you look at the nominator's edit history, you will see breaks between editing sessions. I don't see anything wrong with that and would prefer to give the nominator more time to address these final concerns, but at the same time I recognize that the decision is not mine to make. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:11, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- @MaranoFan: the article has been a GAN for more than 6 months, I felt it was only fair to give the nominator some time to respond as he/she has waited this long for it to be reviewed. It seems the reviewer has become unactive lately, unless @Another Believer: would like to address the concern, I will have to fail this unfortunately. - Lips are movin 11:29, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
@Lips Are Movin: I think I've addressed everything besides the last note. Can you please specify how I should do that (I can see that both the cover art and the sample have fair-rationales)? I Am... ***D.D. 20:38, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
- @My love is love: The rationales seem to have been fixed by another user. A few last minor issues to resolve:
- Ref17, 76, 87 -> Vulture should be New York Magazine
- Ref38 -> The Daily Telegraph should be unlinked as it's already linked.
- Ref64 -> Noise11 should be linked Noise11.com
- Ref65 -> Noise11 should be Noise11.com
- Ref90 -> HitFix should be linked. - Lips are movin 09:54, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Everything Done. Thank you very much for your wonderful review, immense help and patience. I Am... ***D.D. 12:44, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- My pleasure, passing, congrats and keep up the great work! - Lips are movin 12:49, 25 January 2015 (UTC)