Wikipedia:Peer review/Emotion (Carly Rae Jepsen album)/archive1
| Toolbox |
|---|
 | This peer review discussion has been closed. |
I've listed this article for peer review mainly because I believe Wikipedia is a valuable source of information and initiatives like these help to make it more reliable, and partly because I'd like to have my own editing skills assessed. I've firmly believed that Jepsen's work was especially underrated in pop discourse, but my interest in her heightened as new developments on her album were made regarding Ariel Rechtshaid and Dev Hynes's involvement in it; a beautiful intersection of my music taste. Naturally, I followed every bit of information that trickled out; interview, radio show appearances, reviews, think pieces and op-eds as it developed into the "mindie" lore it is now. I've contributed to this article here and there over the past two years, tripling it in size. Of course, as a fan of this given topic it would be natural for me to develop biases when contributing to it which should be identified and rectified in a timely manner.
Thanks in advance, diplomat’s son 08:42, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello, SBD PM here
The tone is slightly biased, which can be seen right from the start. The first line of "Background" says "Following the sudden worldwide success ... really overshadowed the rest of out project". It implies that Jepson should not have made her "Call Me Maybe" single too sucessful, which is an opinion. To improve neutrality: quote figures for sales to support the idea that the single was a "worldwide success"; Say "Jepson was worried that her new album will not get as much sales and reviews as her single" and quote a relevant line to support your judgement; limit usage of words like "success" and "timeless", which involves opinions; limit usage of emotive words like "overshadowed", "disappointed" and "scrapped" (Scrapped is informal and suggests anger/disappointment, say "discarded" or "abundened" instead). The overall tone gives me an impression that the Emotion is a "big come-back" for Jepson, which is not good for neutrality.
There are judgements in the article which suggests original research (But I know its not, because I am a CRJ fan aswell). First line of composition, "Emotion is primarily characterized as a synthpop album, with tinges of new wave respective of Jepsen's influences". The phrasing gives an impression of original research, especially the usage of words like "tinges". Rather, say "Many music critics, including The New York Times, said that Emotion is characterised primarily as synthpop, with elements of 80s pop" etc. 张雨涵 (talk) 15:28, 5 August 2017 (UTC)