Talk:Down Bad (Taylor Swift song)

Down Bad (Taylor Swift song) has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: August 22, 2024. (Reviewed version).

Songs

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong

Taylor Swift Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taylor Swift, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Taylor Swift on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Taylor SwiftWikipedia:WikiProject Taylor SwiftTemplate:WikiProject Taylor SwiftTaylor Swift
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Pop music Low‑importance

	Pop music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wikipedia Article

Okay, this song debuted at #2 on the Hot 100. It clearly has a sort of status amongst other TTPD tracks. Should it have a full article? 63.65.131.178 (talk) 18:52, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Down Bad (Taylor Swift song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Ippantekina (talk · contribs) 17:00, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Agent Squash (talk · contribs) 18:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, @Ippantekina. I'll be reviewing the article in the next few days. It's my first time reviewing for GA so being particularly judicious, but from my first pass it's there or near abouts. Agent Squash 18:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA review

Last updated: 20:52, 22 August 2024 (UTC) by Agent Squash

See what the criteria are and what they are not

1) Well-written

1a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct

1b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation

2) Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check

2a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline

2b) 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)

2c) it contains no original research

2d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism

3) Broad in its coverage

3a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic

3b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style)

4) Neutral:

4) Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each

5) Stable:

5) Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute

6) Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio

6a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content

6b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions

Overall: Passed

Comments:

Background and composition

Good usage of the track by track commentary to inform the article, with commentary used to support in a neutral manner. Agent Squash (talk) 20:48, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Verdict

Passed Well done, this was an excellent, well detailed article to read.Agent Squash (talk) 20:48, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Article

GA Review

GA review

Comments:

Background and composition

Critical reception

Personnel

Charts

Certification

Verdict