Talk:Speak Now World Tour – Live/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: Sebbirrrr (talk · contribs) 18:21, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Placeholder.

Infobox and lead

• Use bullet points instead of {{plainlist}} for the length
• "is a live album" → is this Swift's first, second, third, etc. live album?
• "DVD or Blu-ray" → shouldn't it be "and" instead of "or"?

• It was released on either DVD or Blu-Ray. Ippantekina (talk) 15:15, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

• "save for two" → not sure what this is supposed to mean

• "save for" means "except"; it is a vocabulary used in the Slant article. Ippantekina (talk) 15:15, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

• The sentence describing the tracks is quite long, try to split it
• "was supported by" → from the way it is worded it suggests that "Long Live" was released to promote the album
• "Brazilian singer-songwriter" → I recommend sticking with just "Brazilian singer" as it doesn't seem Fernandes is known for being a singer-songwriter
• "has sold 368,000 copies" → as of?
• "additionally entered the top 30 on charts in Australia—where it was certified triple platinum by the Australian Recording Industry Association (ARIA), Canada, and Japan." → try to reword, it sounds like it was also certified in Australia by Canada and Japan (?)

 Done Sebbirrrr (talk) 09:22, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Background and release

• Ref 7 doesn't state that the album was released in Asia (maybe only in India?)
• Not sure how ref 8 states that it was released in Europe

 Done Sebbirrrr (talk) 09:22, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Content

• Keefe's comment sounds more like a (critical) review of the album

• Trimmed a bit. Ippantekina (talk) 15:15, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

 Done Sebbirrrr (talk) 09:22, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Critical reception

• The Newcastle Herald is a tabloid, I don't think it should be used for album reviews

• Tabloid here means the format, not gossip journalism. Ippantekina (talk) 15:15, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
  • That's fine then. However, looking at The Daily Telegraph's article, I doubt that it is a reliable source considering it was at one point the least trusted newspaper in Australia Sebbirrrr (talk) 09:22, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

• "found the CD rather typical" → I think "typical" should be in quotes
• "but said that "Ours" was disappointing" → McDonnell found "Ours"'s performance disappointing, not the song itself

• In the context of the live album I think mentioning "Ours" suffices as its live recording. Ippantekina (talk) 15:15, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
  • Alright. Sebbirrrr (talk) 09:22, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

• According to the ref, Carlos Olivares Baró is the reviewer for Notimex

Commercial performance

• Saying that peaked within the top 30 is enough, the peaks don't have to be put in brackets

 Done Sebbirrrr (talk) 09:22, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Charts

• The ref for Japan's peak position is dead
• Not sure why the songs's chart performance is included here as they can be found at Taylor Swift singles discography instead

 Not done The chart performance table for the songs should be removed. Sebbirrrr (talk) 09:22, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Release history

• Shouldn't there be one of these as it was released for different formats?

• I think mentioning the release dates in the prose is enough. Ippantekina (talk) 01:31, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
  • Understandable. Sebbirrrr (talk) 09:22, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

 Done

Certifications

• Shouldn't the heading say Certifications for Speak Now World Tour – Live ?

 Not done Sebbirrrr (talk) 09:22, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

References

• Copyvio at 46.2% but that's because of the album's credits. However, I recommend trimming Keefe's quote down as it sits at 37%
• Source check: 3, 7, 8, 9, 18, 23, 26, 28, 32, 33
• According to ref 9 the press release comes from PR Newswire which is considered unreliable
• Ref 32 is dead
• As I mentioned while reviewing "Ours", I'm unsure about Roughstock's reliability

• It has an editorial board, was included as one of the sources for academic research by an American college, and its content was used by the Society for American Music. Ippantekina (talk) 01:33, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the links, it can stay then! Sebbirrrr (talk) 09:22, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Outcome

• @Ippantekina:  On hold for 7 days; article needs just a few tweaks! Sebbirrrr (talk) 20:19, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

• @Sebbirrrr: Thanks for the review! May I ask more than 7 days because I’m on a trip? I’ll ping you right away when I’m back. Cheers, Ippantekina (talk) 05:47, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

  @Ippantekina: That's fine. Enjoy your trip! Sebbirrrr (talk) 14:32, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

  Hi, thanks so much for the review and your patience. Except where I responded, I have addressed your comments. Let me know if this article needs further work asap, because I might not be able to reach back after the weekend. Cheers, Ippantekina (talk) 01:34, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

  @Ippantekina: Don't worry! Thanks for addressing my comments. There are two points that were not addressed and I left a comment about one of the sources under Critical reception. Greets, Sebbirrrr (talk) 09:22, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

  Thanks, I have addressed the two remaining points. Regarding the Australian Telegraph, I removed it based on the many controversies it received; its sensationalism is reminiscent of the Daily Mail. Hopefully the article is in good shape now! Cheers, Ippantekina (talk) 15:40, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

   Passing Everything looks good now. Great job with this one! Sebbirrrr (talk) 15:53, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.