Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Peer review/How You Get the Girl/archive1

< Wikipedia:Peer review

How You Get the Girl

edit
Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to take it to FAC (which would be my first one). I have been significantly expanding the article in the past couple of days and I would appreciate any thoughts and advices on any aspect of the article.

Thanks, Medxvo (talk) 11:11, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ippantekina

edit
  • My immediate suggestion is to avoid the passive voice at all cost. Some examples:
    • It was written by Swift and the Swedish producers Max Martin and Shellback → Swift wrote it with the Swedish producers...
    • Particular praise was directed towards the song's chorus. → Critics particularly praised the chorus
  • I don't think the record labels are necessary for the lead
  • The current structure of "Music and lyrics" is quite confusing. I think it's best to separate paragraphs between the original song and the Taylor's Version re-recording
  • I can't believe that critics described this song as a "ballad" but the sources do verify this, lol, anyway...
  • MusicOMH's Shane Kimberlin, Nylon's Leila Brillson, and PopMatters's Corey Beasley praised the song's chorus, with the lattermost considering it one of Swift's "sing-song" and "indelible" choruses shouldn't this be in the "Critical reception" section?
  • The "Critical reception" section is currently quite all over the place. I suggest you read WP:RECEPTION to work through the organisation and structure. My suggestions for now:
    • 1st paragraph: positive reviews, particularly the production
    • 2nd paragraph: mixed/negative reviews of the production
    • 3rd paragraph: mixed/negative reviews of the lyrics
    • Each paragraph should contain a topic sentence.
      • Oh my, I totally forgot to add the topic sentences.... I adjusted the section according to your suggestions but I left the 4th paragraph for the TV reviews. Can you please take a look and let me know what you think? Medxvo (talk) 16:58, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

— Ippantekina (talk) 10:16, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Ippantekina: Thanks so much for the comments! I've addressed most of them accordingly and left some comments above. I will be waiting for more comments from you, have a good day! Medxvo (talk) 15:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dxneo

edit

As the GA reviewer, I can't really find anything here, but I'll look even harder. In the meantime, some of the best minds have worked on these writing guidelines (How to improve your writing), I figured it would come in handy. Please check it out when you get a chance. dxneo (talk) 08:34, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think there have been some significant changes since the GA review; see the difference between the GA version and the current version. Do you find any writing issues? I'm looking for ways to improve the flow of the article so I would appreciate any specific suggestions/changes or writing recommendations. Thanks in advance! Medxvo (talk) 09:56, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gained

edit

I rarely review articles so it's hard for me to find issues, but I have found some that will hopefully help improve this article for FAC:

  • Released by Big Machine Records, "How You Get the Girl" is an electropop and bubblegum pop ballad... – I don't get why these sentences are combined together, like if I am introduced what label released the song, I expect the other sentence to be similar in content. This applies to all sentences with a similar problem
  • Make sure to not have nouns, pronouns, and verbs be in such close repetition (e.g. by the American singer-songwriter Taylor Swift from her fifth studio album, 1989 (2014). Swift wrote...) nor have it in multiple consecutive sentences (e.g. the three consecutive sentences of the first paragraph in "Live performances and other usage" containing "performed")
  • Try to paraphrase quotes whenever possible. I see several quotes only containing one word in quotation marks that could be changed with a synonym of the word
  • There are some sentences in the last paragraph of "Production and composition" that are better suited in "Critical reception":
    • The List's Rachel Cash described the outro as "triumphant"
    • Mikael Wood of the Los Angeles Times described the song's lyricism as "clunky and bland at the same time"
    • Courteney Larocca of Business Insider considered the lyrics disappointing
Hi @Gained: I believe everything should be done now according to your suggestions. Can you please take another look and check if any of these issues still remains or if there are any issues in general? Thank you so much for the helpful comments, Gained! Medxvo (talk) 16:53, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Medxvo: You're welcome! As for now, I don't know if I could take another look but let me see in a few days.. Gained (talk) 15:23, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Gained: It's fine, feel free to share any thoughts whenever you can! Hope you're doing well. Medxvo (talk) 16:43, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @Medxvo! I have read through the article again. I have not found new issues but it seems like my two concerns are still active; I still see many one-word quotes that could easily be paraphrased and names and verbs that are noticeably repetitive. I have minimize the latter concern that you can observe and hopefully help you in the future. Overall, this article is in great shape to be nominated at FAC but let's see what the other reviewers are going to say. Gained (talk) 14:47, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Gained! I've tweaked some one-word quotes and I guess "earworm" is the only one left; thanks for helping with the second concern! Still, I will try to minimize these two concerns as much as possible from now till the FAC nomination. Many thanks again for the review :) Medxvo (talk) 16:04, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Heartfox

edit
  • "bubblegum pop ballad", "midtempo electropop" → MOS:SEAOFBLUE
  • "The lyrics see Swift giving a guy instructions on how" → maybe "The lyrics see Swift telling a man how" reads less informal. I would change all "guy" to "man" / "girl" to "woman"
  • "Music critics praised the song's catchiness" → this needs to be phrased outside of wikivoice so it is not implied to readers that the song is catchy, when this is subjective
  • ", but some criticized the theme and lyrics as generic and ineffective" → ending a sentence with ", but" can come across as not a neutral point of view as it emphasizes the negative part of the reception
  • " particularly praised" → "praised" was already used in the previous sentence; better to find a different word
  • "charted in Canada" → might as well specify this is the "Canadian Hot 100 music chart"
  • choreography, re-recorded → don't really need to be linked
  • " on October 27, 2014," → where is this supported in the citations?
  • " "dreamlike" " → needs to be clear which citation supports a quote
  • "Spin's Al Shipley praised the production, saying that it sounded "like a million bucks"" → I don't think this belong in the section
  • The List links to a different publication than is cited
    • Oh!!! thank you so much for catching this! Now that we know that it is this The List, would it pass a source review? It seems good to me but you're definitely more experienced than me about this and you would know better if it can be considered reliable enough. BTW, It's mainly used in the article as a source for the lyrics details, except for the one time for the Rachel Cash commentary Medxvo (talk) 20:42, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Technically TheList.com has been cited by academic publishers such as Bloomsbury, Springer, Cambridge University Press, Taylor & Francis, etc. But it doesn't seem like the author has written for many well-known publications. Basically with "high-quality" you need to establish not only that it is a reliable source but that this author/publication is relevant to include. Right now The List is the most-cited reference in the article. I think if it was only cited once or twice that would be okay, but it doesn't seem high-quality enough to justify being the most-cited source. I would maybe keep it for the lyrics details when necessary and exclude Rachel Cash's commentary, as it is not clear why we should care about her opinion.

More to come. Best, Heartfox (talk) 04:25, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Heartfox: I guess this is our first interaction, and hopefully not the last. I've been really inspired by your work and comments on FAC nominations, so thank you so much for providing some helpful comments for me. I've addressed them accordingly and left some comments above where needed. I'll be waiting for more comments from you! Hope you're having a good day. Medxvo (talk) 20:42, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nice to meet you! I left more comments below, just the critical reception left, and then I will probably read the article again. BTW, I do have a GAN open for Vanishing (song), if you were interested in reviewing it. Heartfox (talk) 22:47, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would've loved to review it but it seems like Dxneo has picked it up. For whatever it's worth, the article seems really great to me :) I look forward to reviewing other nominations from you in the future, best of luck! Medxvo (talk) 16:38, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "its ability" → "for an ability"
  • suggest splitting commercial performance paragraph into 2 with one for original and 1 for re-recorded
  • "In the United States, the song debuted at number 40 on the Billboard Hot 100 chart" → "The song debuted at number 40 on the Billboard Hot 100 chart in the United States" allows removal of a comma
  • " "How You Get the Girl (Taylor's Version) reached number 29 on the Billboard Global 200 chart" → I would put this at the start rather than the end as it seems most relevant
  • "Swift included "How You Get the Girl" in the set list of the 1989 World Tour (2015), where she sang it wearing a glowing pink polka dot two piece dress, accompanied by choreography performed by backup dancers with neon umbrellas" → can be split into 2 sentences. "Swift included "How You Get the Girl" in the set list of the 1989 World Tour (2015). She sang it wearing a glowing pink polka dot two piece dress, accompanied by choreography performed by backup dancers with neon umbrellas."
  • "advertisement, where more and more cats appeared whenever Swift took a sip from a can of Diet Coke" → advertisement in which the number of cats increased whenever Swift took a sip from a can of Diet Coke
  • "the version of Adams for "How You Get the Girl" obliterates Swift's upbeat production and features " → Adams's version of "How You Get the Girl" forgoes Swift's upbeat production in favor of
Helpful as always, thanks so much! The round 2 comments should be done now, I will be waiting for more comments! Hope you're doing well. Medxvo (talk) 16:37, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

brachy08

edit

hi! i'm finally ready for my comments ;D

  • therefore substituted → therefore substitute
  • Prior its release → Prior to its release

More to come ;D brachy08 (chat here lol) 03:37, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Brachy! I've been waiting for you :) Will be waiting for more comments! Medxvo (talk) 15:46, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MaranoFan

edit

I love reading a good Taytay article! I'll be here with comments soon.--NØ 19:24, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • "The lyrics see Swift's narrator telling a man how to win his ex-girlfriend back after their breakup" - How about just "the narrator" instead of "Swift's narrator"? Since the article discusses Ryan Adams's cover as well.
    •   Question: Is simply "Swift telling" a good option? That's how it was before Ippantekina's edit today, here. I guess Ippantekina prefers adding "narrator" most of the times for a good reason that I don't really remember now, but Swift here said that these were instructions from her to a man and etc... so I personally don't see problems with "Swift telling" Medxvo (talk) 18:58, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • "The narrator" would be my first choice, followed by "Swift telling" as option 2. Although, this is a small issue and none of the options should be a dealbreaker re: FAC.--NØ 01:57, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • ""How You Get the Girl" was used in a Diet Coke advertisement, and it charted on the Canadian Hot 100 and the US Bubbling Under Hot 100." - maybe a sentence split here since these events do not appear to be related
    •   Question: They were also split before Ippantekina's edit. The previous version was "How You Get the Girl" charted on the Canadian Hot 100 chart in Canada and on the Bubbling Under Hot 100 chart in the United States. Swift included the song in the set list of the 1989 World Tour (2015), with choreography that evoked the musical film Singin' in the Rain (1952). She performed it on certain dates of her later tours, the Reputation Stadium Tour (2018) and the Eras Tour (2023–2024). "How You Get the Girl" was used in a Diet Coke advertisement prior to its release. Is this a good option? Medxvo (talk) 18:58, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • With the sentence about the Coke advertisement moved between the one about the chart entries and the tours, yes, this would appear to be a better option.--NØ 01:57, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I usually link to set list, but I can see this is absent on the other 1989 FAs so it is probably also fine as it is.
  • "Swift produced the re-recorded version with the American producer Christopher Rowe." - Since "re-recorded" appears twice in the preceding sentence, you could say something like "new version" for variation.
  • "while touring on the Red Tour (2013–2014)" - maybe "embarking" to avoid repeating "tour"
  • "The track was recorded by Sam Holland at Conway Recording Studios in Los Angeles, and by Michael Ilbert at MXM Studios in Stockholm, Sweden." - the comma after Los Angeles should probably be removed
  • Sterling Sound seems to go to a link that describes a studio located in New York City, not Edgewater, New Jersey.
    •   Comment: The studio used to have a location in New York City before moving to New Jersey and Nashville. See Tom Coyne being part of it here and also Randy Merrill here. I've fixed the linking issues though and linked at the first incidence. Medxvo (talk) 18:58, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Blank Space" links to MXM Studios, whereas "Shake It Off" does not, so that might be something you want to look into.
  • Do the song durations appear on the CD back covers for 1989 and 1989 TV? Apple Music is usually a safer bet for referencing these.
  • "Pettifier found song's the lyrical imagery similar to the "saccharine fairy tales" - "Pettifier found the song's lyrical imagery similar to "saccharine fairy tales"
  • "some music critics praised the song as catchy and for an ability to combine Swift's old and new sounds" - maybe say "for its ability" instead of "for an ability"
  • "Other critics found the theme and production of "How You Get the Girl" generic and unremarkable—John Caramanica of The New York Times regarded the song as ineffective and Alexis Petridis of The Guardian described it as "a knowing checklist of the kind of love-song platitudes that Swift's peers might easily punt out with a straight face"." - These might work better as separate sentences rather than using the dash.
  • "Marah Eakin from The A.V. Club found the song's "mediocre" midtempo balladic production similar to Swift's other works and inconspicuous compared to the rest of the album" - "Marah Eakin from The A.V. Club thought the song's midtempo balladic production was "mediocre", similar to Swift's other works and inconspicuous compared to the rest of the album" since it is an opinion, not a fact that the production was mediocre :)
  • Brillson's full name and the fact that she is from Nylon should appear at the first mention (Sheffield's sentiment was echoed by Brillson) instead of where it currently is (Several critics praised the chorus of "How You Get the Girl", including MusicOMH's Shane Kimberlin, Nylon's Leila Brillson)
  • Link Spin
  • Since Business Insider isn't providing very important information, you could remove it since it could be singled out as a low quality source in an FAC source review.
    •   Question: It's mainly used as a review and it's considered generally reliable for music articles per WP:RSMUSIC. Can you please clarify further why would it need to be removed? Medxvo (talk) 18:58, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Outside of the Culture section (which does not include Entertainment), Insider is considered a no consensus source (2020 discussion, 2022 discussion), so critical opinions would warrant inclusion if the author had good credentials. In this case, Callie Ahlgrim and Courteney Larocca have not been published in more reputed music-oriented publications, and the latter is described as "the resident Taylor Swift expert", which I am not sure bodes well for her neutrality. But, you could always leave it in and let the eventual source reviewer decide if it is ok.--NØ 01:57, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Abbreviations can be removed if not used in the rest of the article: "(RIAA), (BPI), (ARIA)"
  • "the musical film Singin' in the Rain (1952)" - maybe "the musical romantic comedy film Singin' in the Rain (1952)" to match the introductory sentence in the article?
  • "She sang the track on piano" - maybe "She performed the track on piano"? Since songs aren't really sung on instruments.
  • "Ryan Adams, an American singer-songwriter, covered "How You Get the Girl" as part of his track-by-track cover album of 1989" - maybe "recorded" instead of "covered" to avoid the repetition of "cover"?
  • "Adam's version of "How You Get the Girl" forgoes Swift's upbeat production" - "Adams's version of "How You Get the Girl" forgoes the original's upbeat production", since it was Max Martin and Shellback's production, not Swift's.
  • Is there anything more about the Taylor's Version that can be included in the Composition section? Also, has all of the information about Adams's cover of the song from reviews for his album been included? Just thought I would ask, although I would assume it has.
With all of that out of the way, this should have a smooth sail at FAC. Best of luck!--NØ 15:05, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@MaranoFan: Thanks so much for the review and your kind comments! Most of these should be done now, I've left some comments and questions above. Hope you're having a good day! Medxvo (talk) 18:58, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for constructively engaging with my comments, I was worried I got too nitpicky. That's all from me, and see you at the FAC!--NØ 01:57, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not at all, and personally, I don't really mind if someone gets nitpicky because that would improve the article anyway :) @MaranoFan: thanks for your supportive comments, very much appreciated!!! I've left a comment and two questions above, hope I'm not being too bothersome. Medxvo (talk) 08:00, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/How_You_Get_the_Girl/archive1&oldid=1258728329"