Talk:Hot to Go!/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: Nascar9919 (talk · contribs) 00:49, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Elephantranges (talk · contribs) 22:37, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'll take a crack at reviewing this one; this is my first time doing a GA review so please bear with me, thanks! Elephantranges (talk) 22:37, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Elephantranges: Hey! Thank you for taking this one on. Greatly appreciated. And don't worry- feel free to take as much time as you need. Cheers, mate! Nascar9919 (he/him • t • c) 22:50, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So far in terms of the basics (no edit warring, no bias, grammar is fine, etc.) it looks good, I'll take a closer look tomorrow to examine the references and such.

One addition I would suggest would be a dedicated section covering the commercial performance of the song. This would be especially useful in the case of this song, as you could more thoroughly explain its status as a sleeper hit and its progress regarding chart positions, streaming numbers, etc. Elephantranges (talk) 00:43, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Elephantranges:

Done. Let me know if you need anything else added. Cheers, mate! Nascar9919 (he/him • t • c) 23:36, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good! I've cleared it for number 3 as I think you've got all the major aspects covered, and it doesn't seem like it goes off-topic at any points. Elephantranges (talk) 17:27, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Elephantranges: Hey! You think you could wrap up the review today? Would be great if you can. Thank you! Cheers! Nascar9919 (he/him • t • c) 16:35, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I've been busy and forgot. But yes I can finish right now! Elephantranges (talk) 16:41, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spotcheck complete, no OR, everything looks good! Passing Elephantranges (talk) 17:29, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Elephantranges: Thank you! I think you might've not fully closed the review, however. Haven't received a notification about it yet. Cheers! Nascar9919 (he/him • t • c) 21:38, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it should be good now, I'll check back in a little bit to make sure, though. Thanks for your patience! Elephantranges (talk) 23:33, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

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.