Home • Search • Translate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.

GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Grk1011 ( talk · contribs) 17:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC) reply

I will be reviewing this for you! Grk1011 ( talk) 17:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC) reply

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b ( MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a ( reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c ( OR): d ( copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a ( major aspects): b ( focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b ( appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Infobox and lead

  • 3:26, Maybach, and Warner Bros are not sourced elsewhere in the article
  •  Partly done I mentioned the length where relevant, however why are those labels needed when they are Meek's ones that the album was released through? If you can explain why, I will add in release. -- K. Peake 20:41, 9 August 2023 (UTC) reply
  • "he then wrote a second verse to this" this wording is a bit off. I'd suggest removing that whole sentence. Not sure the particulars of the song's writing process are lead-worthy without the additional context provided in the body.
  • Is "beat switch" a common term? That's what I find confusing. What does it mean to switch (by reading the article I could figure it out, but alone here it was odd). You could say something like It was recorded at the Ocean Sky Hotel in Miami during the late sessions for the album in September 2012. After rapping his first part, Mill requested a beat switch and finished writing the second verse once it was added. The resulting song is a hip hop number with maximalist and grime elements. It contains piano in the two parts and moves between them with the beat switch. Grk1011 ( talk) 21:41, 9 August 2023 (UTC) reply

Background and recording

  • mention that the radio stations are in Philadelphia to add context.
  • the section feels a bit too WP:PEACOCK with expressions such as "instantly recognized the song's greatness" and "taken aback". The lead mentions that the song received universal acclaim, but after reading the article, I find that a bit odd since it wasn't released as a single, experienced "minor reception" and only made it to the bubbling under chart. Not saying it's a bad song, but it's praise doesn't seem to have translated to anything substantial?
  •  Done for the above; the last one is fixed for PEACOCK but the universal acclaim is about the reviews, not commercial reception and it was actually certification double platinum in the end anyway! -- K. Peake 20:41, 9 August 2023 (UTC) reply

Composition and lyrics

  • "The first part representing dreams features.." (check that these refs have this)
  • "described as angelic" by whom?
  • "The second part which represents nightmares then relies..." (check that these refs have this)
  • "not adding" -> suggest without
  • "delivery, delivering" <- word choice

Release and promotion

  • "showing the change in the middle" <- maybe emphasizing"? Also, to whom?

Reception

  • The last review does not support universal acclaim

Live performances

  • no comments

Usage in media

  • The title of this section is a bit misleading since it also includes some covers, samples, etc?

Legacy

  • The Drake quote doesn't need the "..."
  • "the intro" meaning because it was the first track?
  • The second mention of the Super Bowl confused me. I then went back and realized the first mention of streams was actually not about the Super Bowl. Reorganize this paragraph for clarity.
  • I don't think 71% is "soaring"
  • Who is James?
  • The fact that I had to control+F to find that means it should probably be mentioned in full again. The reader doesn't always read the entire at once, typically jumping to a section they're interested in. Mentioning the full name once is enough for a section, not not always for an article. This is extra noticeable here where the last name could also be someone's first name. Grk1011 ( talk) 21:41, 9 August 2023 (UTC) reply
  • The last sentence about the Super Bowl could use terms like "more recently" and "once again" otherwise it's a bit tacked-on

Charts

  • The ref was dead

References

  • earwig's tool shows 36.7%, but that's the quotes

Discussion

@ Kyle Peake: Not much to fix as expected from a seasoned editor like yourself! Placing on hold. Grk1011 ( talk) 17:29, 9 August 2023 (UTC) reply

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.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Dreams_and_Nightmares_(song)/GA1&oldid=1169659345"
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.

GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Grk1011 ( talk · contribs) 17:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC) reply

I will be reviewing this for you! Grk1011 ( talk) 17:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC) reply

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b ( MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a ( reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c ( OR): d ( copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a ( major aspects): b ( focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b ( appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Infobox and lead

  • 3:26, Maybach, and Warner Bros are not sourced elsewhere in the article
  •  Partly done I mentioned the length where relevant, however why are those labels needed when they are Meek's ones that the album was released through? If you can explain why, I will add in release. -- K. Peake 20:41, 9 August 2023 (UTC) reply
  • "he then wrote a second verse to this" this wording is a bit off. I'd suggest removing that whole sentence. Not sure the particulars of the song's writing process are lead-worthy without the additional context provided in the body.
  • Is "beat switch" a common term? That's what I find confusing. What does it mean to switch (by reading the article I could figure it out, but alone here it was odd). You could say something like It was recorded at the Ocean Sky Hotel in Miami during the late sessions for the album in September 2012. After rapping his first part, Mill requested a beat switch and finished writing the second verse once it was added. The resulting song is a hip hop number with maximalist and grime elements. It contains piano in the two parts and moves between them with the beat switch. Grk1011 ( talk) 21:41, 9 August 2023 (UTC) reply

Background and recording

  • mention that the radio stations are in Philadelphia to add context.
  • the section feels a bit too WP:PEACOCK with expressions such as "instantly recognized the song's greatness" and "taken aback". The lead mentions that the song received universal acclaim, but after reading the article, I find that a bit odd since it wasn't released as a single, experienced "minor reception" and only made it to the bubbling under chart. Not saying it's a bad song, but it's praise doesn't seem to have translated to anything substantial?
  •  Done for the above; the last one is fixed for PEACOCK but the universal acclaim is about the reviews, not commercial reception and it was actually certification double platinum in the end anyway! -- K. Peake 20:41, 9 August 2023 (UTC) reply

Composition and lyrics

  • "The first part representing dreams features.." (check that these refs have this)
  • "described as angelic" by whom?
  • "The second part which represents nightmares then relies..." (check that these refs have this)
  • "not adding" -> suggest without
  • "delivery, delivering" <- word choice

Release and promotion

  • "showing the change in the middle" <- maybe emphasizing"? Also, to whom?

Reception

  • The last review does not support universal acclaim

Live performances

  • no comments

Usage in media

  • The title of this section is a bit misleading since it also includes some covers, samples, etc?

Legacy

  • The Drake quote doesn't need the "..."
  • "the intro" meaning because it was the first track?
  • The second mention of the Super Bowl confused me. I then went back and realized the first mention of streams was actually not about the Super Bowl. Reorganize this paragraph for clarity.
  • I don't think 71% is "soaring"
  • Who is James?
  • The fact that I had to control+F to find that means it should probably be mentioned in full again. The reader doesn't always read the entire at once, typically jumping to a section they're interested in. Mentioning the full name once is enough for a section, not not always for an article. This is extra noticeable here where the last name could also be someone's first name. Grk1011 ( talk) 21:41, 9 August 2023 (UTC) reply
  • The last sentence about the Super Bowl could use terms like "more recently" and "once again" otherwise it's a bit tacked-on

Charts

  • The ref was dead

References

  • earwig's tool shows 36.7%, but that's the quotes

Discussion

@ Kyle Peake: Not much to fix as expected from a seasoned editor like yourself! Placing on hold. Grk1011 ( talk) 17:29, 9 August 2023 (UTC) reply

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.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Dreams_and_Nightmares_(song)/GA1&oldid=1169659345"

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook




Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE