Talk:Ghost in the Machine (song)/Archive 1

Wiki Education assignment: Lib101 Academic Research and Critical Thinking3

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 January 2024 and 9 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Khianaroraback (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Khianaroraback (talk) 02:04, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ghost in the Machine (song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: PSA (talk · contribs) 04:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Mike Christie (talk · contribs) 16:47, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:47, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Earwig shows no issues. Spotchecks (footnote numbers refer to this version):

FN 12 cites "Having been categorized as an R&B artist throughout her career, which she believed was because she was a Black woman". Verified.
FN 31 cites 'The latter two instruments were acquired by Bisel within a week of "Ghost in the Machine" and "Kill Bill" being written, and he stated that both songs were partly inspired by his experimentation with "new toy[s]".' It's not quite right to say the songs were inspired by Bisel's new toys (unless he has a song-writing credit?); he's the producer, and what he says is the songs started that week (presumably meaning both SZA's creative work and his production work on them started) and he was inspired. We'd have to say "his ideas for the songs were inspired by ...", or "his work on the songs was inspired by ...", or something similar. I know that some producers take a big role in the creative side of the process, so if in fact he does get credit for songwriting this wording is OK, so long as that's cited.
- All the producers for this album got songwriter credits. However, credits are assumed to be cited to the album's liner notes, which WP:ALBUMSTYLE tells me usually does not need an explicit citation
FN 30 cites "She at first wanted to provide background harmonies only, but she received encouragement from Bisel and the others to record a full verse. They liked her first take and kept it for the final song, almost identical except for some cut-out parts." This is not in the cited source.
- It is in the full podcast episode; around the 23:00 mark, one of the producers says: "Phoebe pulled up a week or two later, and she's in the studio with us, and we're just chatting for, you know, a couple hours or something, just catching the vibe ... 'I don't know if it's good if you guys hate it, I won't take it personally and I can just do some like ethereal background vocals or something like that,' and we're like 'it's gonna be fine, like why don't we just hear what you got.' And she steps out into the booth and just like literally top to bottom things that. That verse like exactly as it is. [We] cut it at one point, but, but lyrically and melodically, it's identical to the very first take." (Noting that I removed several instances of the word "like" as a filler world)
  Got it; didn't think to check the audio itself. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:43, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
FN 40 cites "Angie Martoccio of Rolling Stone connected the lyric to a statement from Bridgers about eliminating negativity in her circles by "hir[ing her] best friends" as part of her crew." Verified, though I don't see how mentioning this is relevant for this article.
- Removed
FN 58 cites "CJ Thorpe-Tracey for The Quietus felt that Bridgers appeared only to give SZA a "magic indie countercultural 'good for business' aura", adding that his annoyance was compounded by how she had had too many guest appearances on others' albums within the same year." Verified.

I'll pause there until you've fixed the spotcheck issue and will do another couple of spotchecks then. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 17:13, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking the review @Mike Christie. I was going to say that per a Good Article Review Circles agreement someone else was set to review this, but the matter seems to have been addressed below. My replies above. PSA 🏕️🪐 (please make some noise...) 10:28, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spotcheck is fine since you pointed me at the audio. I'll read through and do the rest of the review probably tonight. I'll ask at GAN about the circles conflict; I think it's not a problem but will raise it in case someone thinks it is. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:43, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fly-by comments

Hello! I was originally planning to review this article before Mike Christie began their review, so I have a few notes left over I was going to bring up if that's okay. – SupremeLordBagel (talk to me) 03:09, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In the music and production section, Beats Per Minute currently links to Beats Per Minute, which is a redirect to the article for tempo. It should link to Beats Per Minute (website). SupremeLordBagel (talk to me) 03:22, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed
Some of the paragraphs would probably fit better in other sections of the article. I would move the third and fourth paragraphs of the "music and production" section to the "background" section, then rename that to "background and production" and rename the "music and production" section to just "music", or maybe "composition". – SupremeLordBagel (talk to me) 03:09, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Not done. This is a matter of preference, and I have structured many of my SZA GANs---"Kill Bill", "Blind", "Shirt", etc.---like this, to no complaints. IMO, discussing the creation of the song makes more sense when doing so alongside the composition, rather than alongside a more general mise en scene regarding the album .
"Super alternative and strange" was how she described "Ghost in the Machine" reads a little weirdly. Maybe change it to She described "Ghost in the Machine" as "super alternative and strange". – SupremeLordBagel (talk to me) 03:09, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Again, preference.
Change the name of the "credits" section to "credits and personnel". – SupremeLordBagel (talk to me) 03:09, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't know. Isn't this wording redundant?
  - Looking at other song GAs, it seems like the section is either called "credits and personnel" or just "personnel" - but not often "credits". On my first read, I had some difficulty finding this section at first, since "personnel" is more widely used on Wikipedia. This is, of course, personal preference, but I think "personnel" is more familiar to the average reader. SupremeLordBagel (talk to me) 20:59, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The wording of with SZA craving for more humanity from everyone is a little awkward and could be rephrased. SupremeLordBagel (talk to me) 05:34, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- This is reworded
I'm not sure what the source is for the claim that the song's production is "stringed and simple". It doesn't seem to be from the Variety article the claim is attached to. "Stringed and simple" also isn't clearly worded - the Variety article notes the quiet production and use of a banjo, which are a little more specific and could be used instead. SupremeLordBagel (talk to me) 05:39, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Sources conflict on what stringed instruments are used (Pitchfork says those are stringed harps?), so it is hard to tell and being vague is I think for the best. The liner notes just say the instruments used are a piano and keyboards; I'm not risking getting the specifics wrong especially since music critics can be prone to getting them wrong too. Re. "quiet", I didn't wanna use it to minimize the use of direct quotations.
Change "while John Amen of Beats Per Minute write the song's construction was rooted in..." to while John Amen of Beats Per Minute wrote that the song's construction was rooted in...". SupremeLordBagel (talk to me) 06:13, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- This is done

Thanks for posting these notes, SupremeLordBagel; I appreciate it. I'm happy to check on the responses from the nominator when they reply, or if you like you can work with them on these points -- your call. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:12, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I echo the gratitude. @SupremeLordBagel, I have replied to everything. I hope the responses are sufficient. PSA 🏕️🪐 (please make some noise...) 10:28, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

More comments

Sources are reliable. The following prose suggestions are mostly just that -- suggestions -- so please push back if you disagree with anything. I'm doing a little copyediting as I read through; please revert anything you don't like.

"The conversational lyrics express disillusionment with inauthentic relationships and artificial intelligence, with SZA wanting people to behave more humanely in a world she sees has been consumed by vanity, as well as asking her lover to provide escapism from it." A bit convoluted. How about "In the conversational lyrics, SZA expresses disillusionment with inauthentic relationships and artificial intelligence, wants people to behave more humanely, and asks her lover to provide an escape from a world that she see as having been consumed by vanity"?
""Ghost in the Machine" gave Bridgers her first win at the Grammy Awards and helped her become the most awarded person at its 2024 ceremony, specifically winning the Best Pop Duo/Group Performance award.": suggest ""Ghost in the Machine" gave Bridgers her first Grammy win, for Best Pop Duo/Group Performance, at the 2024 ceremony, where she won more awards than any other artist that year".
"She harmonizes her vocals with Bridgers' to match each other's vocal timbres": this doesn't work grammatically: the subject of "match" is SZA, but "SZA matches each other's vocal timbres" makes no sense.
"Similar to other SOS tracks like "Snooze" and "Kill Bill", writing "Ghost in the Machine" was a spontaneous feat; it took SZA 20 to 30 minutes to write her verses": "spontaneous" doesn't mean "quick"; it means "with no prompting". And the first half of the sentence doesn't really work grammatically. How about 'Like "Snooze" and "Kill Bill", also from SOS, ..."?
Suggest putting "craving humanity" in quotes, since it's taken from the lyrics.
"for the perceived lack in meaningful human connections": should be "of", not "in", surely? Or is there a subtlety of meaning I'm missing here?
I think there was enough negative critical commentary for some mention of it to be made in the lead.

That's it for a read-through; I'll have another look when these are addressed. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:57, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Christie: all of the above have been addressed. Thanks, PSA 🏕️🪐 (please make some noise...) 08:01, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixes look good. I read through again; the prose is a little awkward in places but I think this meets GA standards. Passing. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:00, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]