"On July 31, YG Entertainment officially released the album trailer video" the name of the album could be worked in here; currently it's not mentioned outside the lead
"On August 10, two sets of individual member teaser posters were posted to Blackpink's official social media accounts" I think it would be good to specify that the posters are promoting “Pink Venom” rather than the album, since the latter’s promotion is also talked about in the previous paragraph
url-status=live should be added to [1], [3], and [4]
Spotchecks: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5] (albeit with all Korean-language ones checked with translation)
Composition and lyrics
Add url-access=subscription to [17]
Spotchecks: [16], [18], [19], [20]
Critical reception
No problems here!
Spotchecks: [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37]
Accolades
For Best Partnership or Collaboration, Features (Social), shouldn’t the PinkVenomChallenge specifically be listed as recipient?
Spotchecks: [45], [51], [55], [57]
Commercial performance
“most-streamed song by a female artist in a single day in 2022, with 10.79 million streams” not seeing the stream count in the Billboard source
“first song by a female K-pop artist to top Spotify's Global Top Songs chart” not seeing this part in the source
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with
the layout style guideline:
Looks good for the most part, but I had a few notes above. Nothing unfixable of course
B.
Reliable sources are
cited inline. All content that
could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
Critic commentary relies a bit much on quotations for my liking, but it's not going to hold it back from GA. These quotations is about everything detected by Earwig.
Alt needed for the infobox cover, otherwise all good.
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
Really great and high-quality article. I had some comments but all should be relatively easy to fix. Don't see any reason this shouldn't be able to pass.
IanTEB (
talk)
09:54, 28 March 2024 (UTC)reply
"On July 31, YG Entertainment officially released the album trailer video" the name of the album could be worked in here; currently it's not mentioned outside the lead
"On August 10, two sets of individual member teaser posters were posted to Blackpink's official social media accounts" I think it would be good to specify that the posters are promoting “Pink Venom” rather than the album, since the latter’s promotion is also talked about in the previous paragraph
url-status=live should be added to [1], [3], and [4]
Spotchecks: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5] (albeit with all Korean-language ones checked with translation)
Composition and lyrics
Add url-access=subscription to [17]
Spotchecks: [16], [18], [19], [20]
Critical reception
No problems here!
Spotchecks: [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37]
Accolades
For Best Partnership or Collaboration, Features (Social), shouldn’t the PinkVenomChallenge specifically be listed as recipient?
Spotchecks: [45], [51], [55], [57]
Commercial performance
“most-streamed song by a female artist in a single day in 2022, with 10.79 million streams” not seeing the stream count in the Billboard source
“first song by a female K-pop artist to top Spotify's Global Top Songs chart” not seeing this part in the source
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with
the layout style guideline:
Looks good for the most part, but I had a few notes above. Nothing unfixable of course
B.
Reliable sources are
cited inline. All content that
could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
Critic commentary relies a bit much on quotations for my liking, but it's not going to hold it back from GA. These quotations is about everything detected by Earwig.
Alt needed for the infobox cover, otherwise all good.
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
Really great and high-quality article. I had some comments but all should be relatively easy to fix. Don't see any reason this shouldn't be able to pass.
IanTEB (
talk)
09:54, 28 March 2024 (UTC)reply