Talk:Dorothea (song)/GA1

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.

---

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

Nominator: Medxvo (talk · contribs) 14:55, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Reviewer: CatchMe (talk · contribs) 18:53, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Will review this today. CatchMe (talk · contribs) 18:53, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for taking this on! Medxvo (talk) 19:25, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Well-written

• "It peaked at" - I would add "Commercially" before.
  • Done. Medxvo (talk) 20:45, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
• "decided to move to" - just "moved to" could work.
  • Done. Medxvo (talk) 20:45, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
• "succeeded in the context of reversing" - just "succeeded in reversing"?
  • Done. Medxvo (talk) 20:45, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
• "cliche" - "cliché" and link it.
  • Done. Medxvo (talk) 20:45, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Verifiable

• All sources are reliable.
• Earwig's Copyvio says Violation unlikely with the highest similarity at 28.1%, and all the tagged text are lyrics. Good!
• Spot-check (with numbers as of this revision).
  • Refs 4 and 5 verifies Folklore's commercial success. Y
  • Ref 8 verifies that they celebrated and continued working, and that the song was initially written for Big Red Machine, but does not mention "mythopoeic" or a similar word I think.
    • Changed "Dessner believed it would align more suitably with Swift's album themes" to "Dessner felt it was a continuation of the themes of Folklore" Medxvo (talk) 20:45, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Ref 10 verifies that its description as an Americana song. Y
  • Refs 11 and 12 verify its surprise release date and the latter the song's location in the track listing. Y
  • Ref 24 verifies that when, where, how it was performed on June 9. Y
  • Ref 27 verifies its description as country folk. Y
  • Ref 29 verifies that it contains tambourine and guitar, as well as the separation and skipped prom drama. Y
  • Ref 40 verifies its placement in the ranking. Y
  • Ref 39 verifies Rolling Stone's ranking and Sheffield's opinion. Y

Broad

• The Australian gold certification should be mentioned in the lead.
  • Done. Totally forgot that. Medxvo (talk) 20:45, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
• Besides that, it covers the important aspects of the song.

Neutral

• "commended the exceptionally bright melody" seems like the critic's opinion. Change it to something like "commended the melody as "luminous""? (the word he used).
  • Done. Medxvo (talk) 20:45, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Stable

• No edit wars recently. Great.

Illustrated

• The audio sample appears to be correctly liscenced. No other files.
• Could there be a picture of Swift? Is not imposed though and I don't know if that would be appropiate or relevant so I will give you the decision.
  • I don't think any image would help increase readers' understanding of the subject matter... We can add a picture of her performing the Evermore act at the Eras Tour or something but that's not really relevant in my opinion since she performed it as a surprise song... Medxvo (talk) 20:45, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Agree. CatchMe (talk · contribs) 22:03, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Final comments

Great, great article, @Medxvo: I will wait for some minor fixes to be addressed and I will be glad to pass another Evermore article to GA! CatchMe (talk · contribs) 20:03, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

@CatchMe: Thanks a lot for the review and for the kind words!! I've left some comments above. Another Evermore good article let's go ....!!! Medxvo (talk) 20:45, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Congrats on your new GA! I'll ✓ Pass this. CatchMe (talk · contribs) 22:03, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

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.