Talk:Something to Remember/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 18:21, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Prose

Lead

• in "producer" section of infobox, the redirects to Babyface and John Benitez should be corrected.

 Done

• for duration in infobox, have it read "1:11:08" rather than "71:08" for simplicity sake.

 Done

Development

• Per WP:OVERCITE, ref#11 should just be used at the end of the sentence before Madonna's "No, it's about empowering yourself." quote in the second paragraph after quotebox, and ref#13 should just be used at the end of the "attempting to win a lost lover back" sentence in said paragraph.

 Done WP:OVERCITE is an essay, not a guideline. But I agree though

• More WP:OVERCITE in the third paragraph after quotebox- ref#6 should just be used right after the end of the Robert Del Naja quote, ref#9 should just be used at the end of the "she is determined to change his mind" sentence, and ref#13 only needs to be used at the end of the paragraph

 Done

Critical reception

• "Allmusic" should be "AllMusic"

 Done

• the song titles in the quotes from Neil Strauss and Ken Tucker should be ' rather than "

They wrote like that in the review article. Not really sure, but  Done

I'm sure they did, but the standard is to have ' when quoting a quote or quoting someone stating a title.

• More WP:OVERCITE in the second paragraph- ref#37 should just be used at the end of the paragraph

 Done

• More WP:OVERCITE in the third paragraph- ref#44 should just be used at the end of the "ambitious blonde is more singer than celebrity" quote.

 Done

• The last sentence in the third paragraph would read better as something like "In a negative review, Robert Christgau gave the album a 'dud' rating and called it 'a bad record whose details rarely merit further thought.'"

Actually if we check the references, Robert Christgau never wroteSomething to Remember 'a bad record whose details rarely merit further thought'. He simply gave it a 'dud' rating without any commentary. I think if we rewrite it like that, it looks like a direct comments to the album, which is not. Bluesatellite (talk) 01:00, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

In that case, try something like "Robert Christgau criticized the album as 'a bad record whose details rarely merit further thought'."

Still sounding like a direct commentary. He did not say anything to the album. What about this? -> Robert Christgau criticized the album with a "dud" rating, which means "a bad record whose details rarely merit further thought." Bluesatellite (talk) 03:47, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Sounds good to me, though I would probably use "indicating" or "commenting" rather than "which means".

Commercial performance

• More WP:OVERCITE in the second paragraph- ref#55 should just be used at the end of the second sentence of said paragraph.

 Done

Track listing

• for the main section, include the total duration (1:11:08) at the bottom

 Done

Sourcing

Critical reception

• ref#21 (Amazon.com) isn't very suitable for reviews, as things like this, iTunes, and eBay can have all sorts of reviews, most of which aren't exactly professional. It could perhaps be used as a reference for release dates, but I wouldn't recommend it for album/song reviews.

It's a review made by the website editor (which is quite professional), not review from the users/buyers/customers. Amazon.com is also included on Metacritic scoring.

I mainly had the user/buyers/customers in mind, though the site editor definitely has more merit. WP:ALBUM/SOURCES also discourages this use.

If you follow the provided link Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Albums/Archive_26#What_constitutes_a_professional_review.3F, there's no consensus about it, only an opinion of one user who pointed out the "user-submitted reviews". The one on Something to Remember is the editorial review, and again Metacritic approve Amazon.com to their aggregate critics tabulation. Bluesatellite (talk) 03:40, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm not doubting Rickey Wright's credibility, though WP:ALBUM/SOURCES is currently discouraging it. For now, I'd say remove the review, re-open the conversation on Amazon.com on the WP:ALBUM/SOURCES talkpage, see where that goes.

Removed for now. Bluesatellite (talk) 04:29, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Coverage

• No problems here

Neutrality

• No problems here

Stability

• No problems here

GAN Result

If the following is fixed within the next seven days, I will pass for GA.

Thanks for giving time to review the article. Bluesatellite (talk) 01:00, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

My pleasure. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 02:08, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

GA Pass

Very well done, now passing. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 04:40, 25 March 2014 (UTC)