Talk:Imagíname Sin Ti

Imagíname Sin Ti 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: January 8, 2024. (Reviewed version).

Latin music Low‑importance

	Latin music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Latin music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Latin music (music performed in Spanish, Portuguese and the languages of Ibero-America, see project scope for more details) 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.Latin musicWikipedia:WikiProject Latin musicTemplate:WikiProject Latin musicLatin music
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Christian music Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christian music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christian 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.Christian musicWikipedia:WikiProject Christian musicTemplate:WikiProject Christian musicChristian music
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's 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.

Puerto Rico Low‑importance

	Puerto Rico portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Puerto Rico, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to Puerto Rico 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.Puerto RicoWikipedia:WikiProject Puerto RicoTemplate:WikiProject Puerto RicoPuerto Rico
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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

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.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Imagíname Sin Ti/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Grk1011 (talk · contribs) 19:26, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Magiciandude: I will review this for you over the next few days. Please also consider reviewing one of my noms or another to help with the backlog. Grk1011 (talk) 19:26, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

This table will be updated as items are addressed:

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.
a (reference section): b (inline 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Infobox and lead

Image licensing checks out
clarify which version the music video of. English or Spanish or both.
genres sourced in body

Background and composition

Ref 1 accepted in good faith. Title appears to support reception
I'm not sure this quote is a quote: "involved in every step of the way". It appears that you are quoting Billboard's interpretation of what he said but allocating it directly to Fonsi?
Ref 10 and the poem quote check out
Which specific information is ref 6 backing up? AllMusic has some restrictions/limits as defined at WP:RSPSS

Promotion and reception

What are the promotional activities? Is it just the music video?
Add (2006) for the greatest hits album
The Telemundo comment is weird without some context. It isn't clear upon first read that some of these song reviews are much later after the release. Consider adding something like "wrote in 2017".
I didn't realize that the Suzette 15 songs comment was from 2017. The more I thought about it, the more confused I got until I saw when it was written. I imagined someone writing in 2000 that a singer had 15 best songs when they only had 2 albums out at the time... That's like all their songs! Again, context would be helpful here to establish that she's actually looking back at his repertoire over a number of years.
Similar to ref 6, what is ref 28 backing up?
You can mention some of the year-end charts in this section.

General

I performed a basic copyedit. There were a few missing words or tense issues that were easy enough to fix as I read through. You should still do one last top to bottom read of the article to catch anything I may have missed.
Earwig's copyvio tool shows 13.8%, which is violation unlikely. Great.

Discussion

Hi @Magiciandude: not too much to fix. Grk1011 (talk) 15:30, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review! I'll get to work on this either next Tuesday or Thursday. Erick (talk) 18:15, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed everything that was brought up on the review. For the Allmusic references, ref 9 sources the writers while ref 28 sources the name and year of release for Nievera's album. Erick (talk) 22:35, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! A couple more things that sprouted up:

"Pérez also penned the opening track "Imagíname Sin Ti", along with Mark Portmann, a "R&B-tinged ballad"" <- This sentence doesn't make sense to me, specifically the genre at the end. Reword.

Fixed -Dcdiehardfan (talk) 19:28, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In the promotion and reception section, replace was "released as the album's lead single" with "was released as Eterno's lead single" (keep the wikilinks tho)

Done -Dcdiehardfan (talk) 19:28, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Swap the greatest hits and remix album mentions in the next sentence so that it reads chronological.

Done -Dcdiehardfan (talk) 19:28, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References: You didn't really explain the rationale for inclusion regarding the Allmusic refs. Specifically WP:ALLMUSIC reads RhythmOne websites are usable for entertainment reviews with in-text attribution. Some editors question the accuracy of these websites for biographical details and recommend more reliable sources when available. Editors also advise against using AllMusic's genre classifications from the website's sidebar. (Allmusic is a RhythmOne website).

Ref 6: shouldn't be used for genres without being part of a review N

Removed AllMusic ref, I believe San Antonio and CD liner notes ref should suffice no? -Dcdiehardfan (talk) 19:28, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 13: backs up the track's inclusion on the greatest hits (as part of an attributed review) Y
Ref 14: backs up the track's inclusion on the remix album (as part of a track listing) Y
Ref 23: this ref leaves too much open to interpretation. It does not say that an English version of the song is on her album; it merely identifies a song named "Imagine Me Without You" and the same writers in the track listing. You'll need to find something more straightforward. The subsequent ref (#24) also strangely does not mention the song as a being a cover despite being a relatively robust article. N

Comment: The Jesus Freak Hideout ref does say As the album draws to a close, Jaci slows things down to create heart-felt, passionate, and powerful ballad such as "Imagine Me Without You," Also another confusion as I believe ref 21 should back it up and it hasn't been contested. -Dcdiehardfan (talk) 19:28, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 29: This is probably fine for the name and year of release for the album, but it too does not actually show evidence of the song being a cover (Ref #10 does). Suggest relocating this ref within the sentence to be more precise in what it is backing up. ?

Done prior to me I think -Dcdiehardfan (talk) 19:28, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know if you have any other questions or need clarification! Grk1011 (talk) 13:48, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Magiciandude: checking in to make sure you saw this. Grk1011 (talk) 13:45, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Grk1011! I am just a random editor happening to pass by this article after noticing that the original nominator seemed to have been active. I did my best to try and fix all the issues I could as above, but of course, if there's anything left to do, let me know, hopefully some issues should've been cleared up. -Dcdiehardfan (talk) 19:28, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Dcdiehardfan: thanks for jumping in. I think the only items are Ref 23 (now ref 22) and to a lesser extent ref 29 (now ref 28). As far as I can tell, none of the refs identify these songs as covers. They certainly talk about a song named "Imagine Me Without You", but nowhere does it appear to say English version of "Imagíname Sin Ti" or a cover of Fonsi's English version. Grk1011 (talk) 00:54, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Grk1011! Thanks for the response. You're right, I'm also not seeing it there. I also can't find sources that the song is a cover, and am struggling to find any sources in general about the Crystal Clear album itself. I believe it's a bit bold of me to do so, but I feel like I might have to excise that whole para as I genuinely can't find any material for it. I'll let both you and the prime editor, @Magiciandude, tell me what to do. If everyone is ok with it, I can then delete it until there are better sources corroborating it. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 01:17, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the absence I was feeling ill for the past few days. I will get back to work on this either Sunday or Monday. Erick (talk) 17:27, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Magiciandude No worries. Just a reminder to resolve the Jaci Velasquez issue, I think that's the only issue now. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 19:40, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done Added a source from Billboard that cites Jaci's song being a cover version. Erick (talk) 22:13, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Passing now! Grk1011 (talk) 13:58, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.