Talk:Vagina (album)/GA1

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.

---

GA Review

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

Reviewer: SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 22:09, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Reviewing. Starting with assessments of the infobox and lead section.

Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 04:07, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Infobox

• File:Vagina, Alaska Thunderfuck.jpg has an appropriate FUR.
  • Like ---Another Believer _(Talk) 04:07, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
• If it's known who produced the song's tracks, then I would include their name(s) here
  • Spotify only displays writing credits. I've made sure those are correct and added Spotify as a source to the Track listing section. I've also asked about credits here, and seems this is not uncommon. I wish I could add more production information, but as far as I know, the credits are as complete as possible based on the usual sources. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 00:31, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
• I'm surprised no genres are listed here
  • Me, too, but I cannot find sources specifically describing the album as a specific genre. Alaska says the album has "hard electronic beats" and the album charted on a comedy album, but I'm not sure either are good enough for adding 'electronic music' or 'comedy' to the genre field. What do you think? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 00:23, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
    • If anything, I'd say it's enough to add comedy. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 00:59, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

      SNUGGUMS, I've added genre to infobox as well as category. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:15, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Lead

• No discussion of album's composition/themes?
  • I've searched and reviewed sourcing thoroughly. If there's coverage of the music, lyrics, or themes in more detail, it's hiding well. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 00:24, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
    • Shame we couldn't get more clear answers :/. At the very least, you can say its lyrics involve drinking and perhaps genitals based on the "getting wasted and body parts that you can't talk about on TV" comment used later on. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 00:59, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

      SNUGGUMS, I don't know to what extent there are references to drinking or genital specifically, or even 'getting wasted' or 'body parts'. These may be just passing mentions, and I don't want to suggest to readers this is a major theme. I'd rather just keep the quote and not attempt to make any summaries about lyrics or themes. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:13, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

      • Fair enough. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 01:21, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
• You don't need to cite content here that's already sourced within article body.
  •  Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 00:24, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

More to follow in the future. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 22:09, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Development and composition

• File:Dragcon2-SAT-33 (47937192816) (cropped).jpg shouldn't leak into the next section. On a more positive note, there are no copyright concerns with it.
  • I've re-arranged. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:07, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
• I'm not sure we need to use this for how the "no other name" bit when that's already covered here
  •  Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:07, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
• "Alaska has said she wanted to name her second album Vagina" isn't supported by the attributed citation, and such detail would be better for that album's article anyway.
  • Oops! I've fixed the URL. Must have been a copy/paste error. Good catch! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:11, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
• Digital Spy has a space in between its words
  •  Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:11, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
• "[she loves] those things" should be "I love those things"
  •  Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:11, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
• The last two sentences need to be cited, and this is an easy fix with the Apple link used above (that for some reason was misidentified as a piece from Vice)
  •  Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:11, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Up next will be "Release and promotion". SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 00:59, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Release and promotion

• Unless there's something I've missed, neither citation used for the midnight bit appears to specify any time of day, so let's just say it was released on May 24, 2019.
  • Hmm, I specifically remember reading "midnight" at one point, but I can't find the source so I've trimmed. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 02:36, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
• "Referencing her song "Leopard Print", Alaska wore a leopard print dress, headband, and gloves to RuPaul's DragCon LA; additionally, she had 'four minions, who flanked the queen in leopard print bodysuits that fully covered their faces'." is quite a mouthful! I'd split it into separate sentences by turning the semi-colon into a period.
  •  Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 02:33, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Side note: I'm skeptical about the use of File:TomasCostanza.jpg when its file source doesn't appear to show that image, which makes it harder to verify authenticity and that the licensing is valid. Bringing this up now because it was inserted after my comments on the section featuring that. Either find a new URL that does, or replace it with a different picture entirely.

This is the only image of Tomas Costanza at Wikimedia Commons. I'm inclined to just leave the image and let a bot delete it if removed from Commons. But, if this must be addressed for the article to be promoted to GA status, I will just remove the image from the page. Your preference? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 02:33, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

• I'd personally prefer to remove altogether (at least for now) when there are no available substitutes. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 02:36, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

  SNUGGUMS,  Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 02:38, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Reception

• I'd elaborate a bit on the NewNowNext review and how it calls certain tracks "instantly classic"
  •  Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 02:44, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
• Per WP:REPCITE, you don't need to cite the same reference more than once consecutively within a paragraph, so just having ref#12 used after "making fun of things that would usually bother people with a gay stereotype" is sufficient.
  •  Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 02:39, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
• Are any additional reviews available? Adding those would be helpful.
  • If I could find any others, I'd incorporate. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 02:39, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Getting through this faster than I initially thought I would. Once you've gone through the above, I should be able to assess everything else in one swoop. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 02:24, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

SNUGGUMS, Yup!, sounds good. These short articles are fun to work on because they are quick and easy. Thanks for reviewing. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 02:44, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

My pleasure, now continuing.....

Track listing

• 17:42 is a vast understatement for the total duration
  • Oops! Forget to fix when copied over from another article. Good catch!  Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 04:07, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Charts

• No issues
  • Like ---Another Believer _(Talk) 04:07, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

References

• Don't italicize Digital Spy, MTV News, Pride.com, or Spotify
  •  Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 04:10, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
• Citations 3 (Digital Spy) and 5 (MTV News) are missing publication dates
  •  Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 04:10, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Overall

• Prose: Nearly there; just needs an in-prose mention of release date that isn't part of infobox or lead
  • Mentioned in "Release and promotion" section. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 04:11, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
• Referencing: Album duration is way off, and some reference formatting needs to be fixed
• Coverage: Can you find anything on album sales? If no, then just talk about when and how high it first entered the comedy album charts within the "charts" section.
  • I don't see sales info, but I've added mention of the chart position to the "Reception" section. I've generally seen "Charts" sections kept to just the table, and in this case the single sentence blends into the critical reception text nicely. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 04:15, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
    • I do realize "Charts" sections are normally just tables. However, the problem with including chart details within "Reception" is that such a placement gives a false impression that commercial performance is connected to reviews, so I've moved it to "Release and promotion". Anyway, now passing! SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 15:12, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
• Neutrality: It doesn't look like there's any bias
• Stability: Seems fine to me
• Media: Both images are properly licensed
• Verdict: On hold for seven days as of this comment. I'm sure you'll get that in time. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 03:48, 24 May 2020 (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.