Jump to content

Talk:Let There Be Love (Christina Aguilera song)/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: Robin (talk · contribs) 22:59, 5 April 2013 (UTC) I'll review this.[reply]

Refs

[edit]

Lead

[edit]
  • In a Lotus album preview with VEVO --- remove. Isn't necessary
  • Aguilera reveleaed that she knew of Martin when she first debuted in the music industry, but wanted to collaborate with other producers before working with him. he singer continued to say that now she has come full circle in her career, and that she felt like it was the right time collaborate on material for her album. --- These sentences convey the same message; merge them with less detail.
  • Its instrumentation consists of synths, "loud" drums and electronicas, and received comparisons to the songs recorded by Usher, "DJ Got Us Fallin' in Love" and "Scream", both of which were produced by Martin. --- Link instrumentation and change 'consists' to 'incorporates' and "loud" to abrasive. We don't know whether those particular attributes encompass its composition. In addition, remove the Usher comparisons as only one reviewer thinks this.
  • Many of them praised Aguilera for not over singing and delivering a solid vocal performance, while others complimented the musical structure and composition. --- Change to: Many reviewers considered "Let There Be Love" a stand-out track on Lotus; plaudits centered on Aguilera's vocal performance and the track's musical structure.
    • I don't believe any critics called it a standout track though. Plaudits is the complete wrong word to use, I've never heard of it.  — AARONTALK
      • 'best' and 'stand-out' are basically synonyms. Plaudit(s) is a synonym for praise, so its perfectly acceptable. Try this: "Many reviewers considered "Let There Be Love" one of the best songs on Lotus; praise centered on Aguilera's vocal performance and the track's musical structure." — Robin (talk) 23:54, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upon the release of Lotus, the song debuted on the South Korea international singles chart at number 92 with digital download sales of 2,945. --- link South Korea's single chart and change 'with' with due.
    • We know the exact amount here, so "with" is the correct word choice. If we didn't know, then yes "due" would be correct.  — AARONTALK
      • I still don't see why "due" isn't appropriate; it charted due to those numbers. Why does it matter whether we know the exact number. Actually, your contradicting yourself; see the charts section. :/ — Robin (talk) 23:54, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upon the release of Lotus, the song debuted on theSouth Korea international singles chart at number 92 with digital download sales of 2,945 ----- Something went wrong here. — Robin (talk) 23:54, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Aguilera performed the song for first time at the 40th American Music Awards on November 2012, as part of a medley with Lotus tracks "Lotus Intro" and "Army of Me". She also performed the song on The Voice with the team who she coaches. --- Aguilera performed on televised programs such as the 40th American Music Awards and The Voice. The current sentences are plagued with too much detail for a lead.

Background and recording

[edit]

This section is tedious and jarring to read. I suggest removing 3/4 of the statements.

Development

[edit]

However, she felt at this point in her career with Lotus, Aguilera felt it was the right time to work together, saying: --- change saying to 'stating' or 'reflecting'. Formal prose.

Composition and lyrics

[edit]
  • Opening sentence; change combines to incorporates and dancepop to dance-pop. We don't know whether those particular genres encompass its composition.
    • They are both sourced, so yes they are a part of the composition. Combines is fine here because of the magnitude of genres. You would use incorporates for one, maybe two, other genres.  — AARONTALK 23:23, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

More to come. — Robin (talk) 22:59, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • According to Kitty Empire for The Guardian, the song "about as formulaic as club pop gets" but "resonates effectively. ---- the song is "about as formulaic as club pop gets" but "resonates effectively."
  • He also noted that Aguilera was probably aware that the "Let There Be Love"'s melody bared strong resemblances to the songs, which most likely prompted her to spend "the last minute wailing all over the place."[15] Aguilera "roars" the lyrics "Let there be let there be love/ Here in the here in the dark" over trance beats and projects a "saucy" tone as she sings ""Hit the right spot, making my eyes roll back." ---- These sentences are redundant for a composition section as they belong in a critical reception section. Remove.

Critical reception

[edit]

Live performance

[edit]
  • Change section title to 'Live performances'
  • Aguilera also performed "Let There Be Love" with her team of aspiring singer's on The Voice, a singing competition on which she is a coach. ---- Change 'singer's' to singers.

Charts

[edit]

Status

[edit]

On hold. — Robin (talk) 23:54, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've added notes on queries that I'm adamant about. You have until 13 April. — Robin (talk) 12:26, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Fail it then, because you are wrong on several things. How you can say that musical structure, vocal and lyrical information does not belong in the composition section and that the picture of Usher should not be included is to be honest, stupid. A mere mention of a person is reason to include a picture. This song was heavily compared to two of his songs. I'm adamant on not changing these because you are wrong. Fail the article, but then you may be approached by a senior editor for failing without good reason.  — AARONTALK 14:51, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Failing. — Robin (talk) 15:10, 8 April 2013 (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.