Talk:Shut Up and Drive/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jivesh1205 (Talk) 17:25, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Get ready to be slayed. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 17:26, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

I assume Te Amo will be finished first before any notion is thought about started this one. Calvin • ^{Watch n' Learn} 18:55, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 03:50, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Status?

This review has been open for almost two weeks, with nothing to show so far. Please update on the status. If the reviewer is unable to complete the review in a timely manner, then allow another editor to take it over. AstroCog (talk) 15:01, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

I will do it. I believe instead of doing hasty reviews, it is better to do a nice long review with practically every issues pointed out, right? Jivesh1205 (Talk) 15:07, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Detailed is good. But "hasty" and "timely" are not the same thing. I just wanted to make sure that this review was not forgotten. AstroCog (talk) 15:27, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Don't worry. I never forget something i take under my belt. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 15:29, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Media review

• Music sample should be reduced to 21 second.
• The image (in LP) and cover art are good (except remove the full stop).

Jivesh1205 (Talk) 15:25, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Fixed? Jivesh1205 (Talk) 18:34, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Not. But, will do it shortly.  Done — Tomica1111 • Question Existing? 08:49, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

I'll be finishing this review tomorrow. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 17:26, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

I will fix the prose myself. But do the references when I post them. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 13:31, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Why are you doing it yourself Jivesh?? Be careful of being accused of being to closely linked to the article, because I am sure there are people who would fail this based on the fact that you are amending things and not Tomcia. Calvin • ^{Watch n' Learn} 15:13, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

It's ok. Many reviewers copy edit the article during their review and list issues if they are confused. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 15:26, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Hmm okay. I just don't think it is a good way of reviewing. How is the nominator mean't to learn from their mistakes? I guess it is just my way of thinking. Calvin • ^{Watch n' Learn} 15:28, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Wow, you really follow my contributions. Lol. And Calvin, do you learn from your mistakes? Remember what I did on "Te Amo"?Jivesh1205 (Talk) 15:29, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

That's my point. But I can see what is happening now anyway. Calvin • ^{Watch n' Learn} 15:32, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

What is happening? — Tomica1111 • Question Existing? 15:33, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Stay calm please. It has been dealt with. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 15:37, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

No, contrary Jivesh. I am just asking what is happening, cause I can not understand. — Tomica1111 • Question Existing? 15:38, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I was actually talking about something else, but it doesn't matter. I've learn't not to say what I feel on here. Calvin • ^{Watch n' Learn} 15:41, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Read it from the beginning. I said I was going to c/e the article but Calvin said that it is not right from his pov. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 15:42, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

The copy-edits I Made

• Lead  Done
• Background and composition  Done
• Critical reception  Done
• Chart performance  Done
• Music video  Done
• Live performances  Done

Jivesh1205 (Talk) 13:05, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Jivesh. I am expecting the reference issues so I can resolve them. — Tomica1111 • Question Existing? 13:06, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Charts and certifications

• Apply WP:ACCESS. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 13:08, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

•  Done — Tomica1111 • Question Existing? 14:13, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

References

•  Doing... Jivesh1205 (Talk) 13:08, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Comment – The following is from her 2007 interview with Rolling Stone before the release of "Umbrella". It talks about the inspiration: "Cars and motor vehicles of all kinds are not exactly strange bedfellows with commercial music, usually with a specifically male connection - power, virility, the wind in your hair and all that jazz. This has been written principally by guys, but the innuendo here is all female, which is hardly surprising, because the lady simply oozes sexuality." You can add this for enhancing the section. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 17:00, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

I will be posting more in an hour. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 14:05, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

• 1. Should be MTV News and should not be italicized.

•  Done — Tomica1111 • Question Existing? 14:21, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

•  Not done Jivesh1205 (Talk) 12:13, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

• 2. FMQB is a magazine and it should be in italics

•  Done — Tomica1111 • Question Existing? 14:21, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

• 3. Should be Amazon.com (UK). Amazon Inc

•  Done — Tomica1111 • Question Existing? 14:21, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

•  Not done properly Jivesh1205 (Talk) 12:13, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

• 4. Link American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers and remove The

•  Done — Tomica1111 • Question Existing? 14:21, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

• 5. Allmusic should not be in italics and the publisher is Rovi Corporation

•  Done — Tomica1111 • Question Existing? 14:21, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

• 6. Use {{cite news}}

• Can you tell me in which exact references should I apply the template. Cause I am bad at it, you know... — Tomica1111 • Question Existing? 14:21, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

• It is used for newspapers. Others (magazine, online publications, blogs) use {{cite web}}. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 14:24, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

• Jivesh, sorry, but I can't find where should I apply the template. There are references where its already applied on and I can't see others where it should also be. — Tomica1111 • Question Existing? 10:48, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

• Lol, that's very easy. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 11:58, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

• I know, but I really can't find other newspapers or journals. Can you check again please? — Tomica1111 • Question Existing? 12:00, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

•  Not done Use the cite news template. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 12:13, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

• 8. Pitchfork Media should no be in italics and the publisher is Ryan Schreiber

•  Done — Tomica1111 • Question Existing? 14:21, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

• 9. Should be BBC Music. BBC

•  Done — Tomica1111 • Question Existing? 14:21, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

• 10. PopMatters is self published and it should not be in italics.

•  Done — Tomica1111 • Question Existing? 14:21, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Jivesh1205 (Talk) 14:05, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

I am going to continue the review now. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 12:04, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

More

• 11. Check the publisher.
• 12. Why is Slant Magazine listed twice? It is not supposed to be in italics.
• 14. Link everything there
• 15. Use {{citeweb}}
• 26. Link Rap-Up
• 27. Unlink and be consistent.
• 28. Link Apple Inc
• 34. {{citeweb}}
• 37 & 38. Over-linking of Discogs
• 58. Remove ARIA Charts and have a look at how you wrote the date. Be consistent.
• 59. Why is Ultratop 50 in italics? + date
• 60. Why is Ultratop 40 in italics? + date
• 61. Why is ChartsPlus in italics? + link The Official Charts Company + date
• 64. Refer to FN 3

Overall, the article was quite underprepared but it will pass. :D Jivesh1205 (Talk) 12:26, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

 Done all. Haha I couldn't understand your point, but it was very easy though xD ! — Tomica1111 • Question Existing? 12:36, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

• 12. Why did you unlink Slant Magazine?

Please fix ^^^ and I am passing the article.

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Jivesh1205 (Talk) 05:19, 30 December 2011 (UTC)