Toolbox |
---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…
It is nearing the standards (I believe) that are required for WP:FA. However rather than jumping straight into an FA review I thought it would be good to get a wider view on what people think about the state of the article. I've tried to use a wide variety or reliable sources and search long and hard to create an informed article about each aspect of the song.
Thanks, -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 | (talk) 19:46, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Resolved comments from Blackjacks101 |
---|
So I have just looked over the lead and I found a few problems, but nothing major....
Lead
I'll get to the rest in a little bit, but other than that good work - the lead does a great job at summarizing the article-- Blackjacks101 ( talk) 14:44, 20 December 2010 (UTC) I am continuing the review now...I am starting to find more problems Composition Music:
Commercial Performance
Last Paragraph focuses too much on the covers, we are focusing on Guetta’s version not the others and also this information can put later in the article I suggest that information on the covers are removed from Commercial Performance Commercial Performance needs a lot of work I suggest going back and checking it again Music Video Did nobody critique the music video? Other than that looks good Live performances and covers This is where the information on the cover should be added in my opinion Before I do more in depth editing I strongly advise you too look at the Commercial and Music Video Sections, for commercial you should try re-wording some things and taking irrelevant stuff out, as well for the Music Video section try finding some criticism but if you can`t no big deal. I know I have been kind of picky but I have seen the drama involving FA noms and to avoid this drama, simple mistakes like the ones above should not be brought up during the actual nomination process. After you have dealt with some of these problems and have gone pack to look at it, I`ll continue. All in all though this article does have potential.-- Blackjacks101 ( talk) 16:03, 20 December 2010 (UTC) Lead
Live Performances and covers
Cover versions
Other than that, everything looks good. I suggest you can somebody who has been involved with an actual FA to edit this some more so they can point out other problems if there is. For the most part though, this article is very well written and with some more improvements it could possibly become FA, Good Work!-- Blackjacks101 ( talk) 17:26, 20 December 2010 (UTC) |
Will comment on it shortly Uniqueboy :) — Legolas (talk2me) 13:24, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Resolved comments from Crowz RSA |
---|
;CrowzRSA comments
|
Toolbox |
---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…
It is nearing the standards (I believe) that are required for WP:FA. However rather than jumping straight into an FA review I thought it would be good to get a wider view on what people think about the state of the article. I've tried to use a wide variety or reliable sources and search long and hard to create an informed article about each aspect of the song.
Thanks, -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 | (talk) 19:46, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Resolved comments from Blackjacks101 |
---|
So I have just looked over the lead and I found a few problems, but nothing major....
Lead
I'll get to the rest in a little bit, but other than that good work - the lead does a great job at summarizing the article-- Blackjacks101 ( talk) 14:44, 20 December 2010 (UTC) I am continuing the review now...I am starting to find more problems Composition Music:
Commercial Performance
Last Paragraph focuses too much on the covers, we are focusing on Guetta’s version not the others and also this information can put later in the article I suggest that information on the covers are removed from Commercial Performance Commercial Performance needs a lot of work I suggest going back and checking it again Music Video Did nobody critique the music video? Other than that looks good Live performances and covers This is where the information on the cover should be added in my opinion Before I do more in depth editing I strongly advise you too look at the Commercial and Music Video Sections, for commercial you should try re-wording some things and taking irrelevant stuff out, as well for the Music Video section try finding some criticism but if you can`t no big deal. I know I have been kind of picky but I have seen the drama involving FA noms and to avoid this drama, simple mistakes like the ones above should not be brought up during the actual nomination process. After you have dealt with some of these problems and have gone pack to look at it, I`ll continue. All in all though this article does have potential.-- Blackjacks101 ( talk) 16:03, 20 December 2010 (UTC) Lead
Live Performances and covers
Cover versions
Other than that, everything looks good. I suggest you can somebody who has been involved with an actual FA to edit this some more so they can point out other problems if there is. For the most part though, this article is very well written and with some more improvements it could possibly become FA, Good Work!-- Blackjacks101 ( talk) 17:26, 20 December 2010 (UTC) |
Will comment on it shortly Uniqueboy :) — Legolas (talk2me) 13:24, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Resolved comments from Crowz RSA |
---|
;CrowzRSA comments
|