Talk:Keith (song)

Keith (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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 8, 2022	Good article nominee	Listed

This article is written in New Zealand English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, analyse, centre, fiord) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Country Music Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Country Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to country 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.Country MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Country MusicTemplate:WikiProject Country MusicCountry Music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

New Zealand: Music Low‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics 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.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the New Zealand music task force (assessed as Low-importance).

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 articles

Women in Music Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in 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.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 08:28, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

This shouldn't take too long --K. Peake 08:28, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox and lead[edit]

Shouldn't you write self-published instead of independent in the infobox since the latter may lead to readers thinking it is the label name?
- Since there is an article titled independent record label page I believe that independent is the right word to use. Sebbirrrr (talk) 21:25, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

*Directly after writing/production, mention the recording in the same sentence

~~"it was independently released on" → "It was independently released as a single on" starting a new sentence here~~

~~"consider it a tribute song to him." → "to consider it as a tribute song to him."~~
""Keith" peaked at" → "The song peaked at"
- "Song" is already mentioned twice in the previous sentence though. Sebbirrrr (talk) 21:25, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

*New Zealand Hot Singles chart → New Zealand Hot Singles Chart, with the wikilink per MOS:LINK2SECT

~~"Bell sang the track on" → "Bell sang it on"~~

~~"Bell was lauded by" → "Bell was applauded by" per the body~~
"She also performed "Keith" in" → "She also performed the song in"
- The next sentence begins with "The song" and I believe that would also be repetitive. Sebbirrrr (talk) 21:25, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Add a part about the synopsis
- For the live video or for the music video? Sebbirrrr (talk) 21:25, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Background and release[edit]

*"when she brought the song to" → "when she brought the idea to"

~~"songs take you back."" → "songs take you back"." per MOS:QUOTE~~

~~Mention that the release was as a single~~

Composition[edit]

*""Keith" is a country song" → "Musically, "Keith" is a country song"

"and that she had it on her phone for year before deciding to" → "and was on her phone for year before she decided to"

Remove speech marks around pays tribute since that is not a direct quote from both sources

~~"into our past."" → "into our past"." per MOS:QUOTE~~

Reception and promotion[edit]

"Triple M stated that" → "The staff of Triple M stated that"
- "The staff" is not mentioned in the composition section either though. Sebbirrrr (talk) 21:25, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Why are you using re-entered despite no previous position having been mentioned?
- In the source the ribbon on the bottom right of "Keith" says "RE-ENTRY". Should I still look for its original position? Sebbirrrr (talk) 21:25, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

*"calling it "touchy"" → "calling it "touching"" per the source

~~"catchy it was."" → "catchy it was"." per MOS:QUOTE~~
"An official music video was" → "An official music video for the song was" with the wikilink
- Used "the single" instead as song is mentioned in the previous sentence already. Sebbirrrr (talk) 21:25, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Track listing[edit]

Good

Charts[edit]

Good

Release history[edit]

Good

References[edit]

Copyvio score looks strong at 15.3%!!!
What exactly makes Who a reliable source on ref 13?
- According to its article, it is the sister paper of People Magazine which is greenlit at WP:RSP. The only bit Who sources is the guitar one but I'm not opposed to removing it if you think it isn't reliable enough! Sebbirrrr (talk) 21:25, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Final comments and verdict[edit]

On hold until all of the issues are fixed! --K. Peake 21:21, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- @Kyle Peake: Thanks a lot for reviewing! Let me know if I missed something. Cheers, Sebbirrrr (talk) 21:25, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sebbirrrr Either use the song's title only once in the lead or split into two paras and use it once in each, add mv synopsis and you need to write the staff of since that's reception. --K. Peake 10:33, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Kyle Peake: Done. Let me know how it looks now. Sebbirrrr (talk) 20:39, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Pass now, only had to do some quick copy editing! --K. Peake 21:56, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]