Talk:Love Won't Wait/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Esprit15d (talk · contribs) 17:50, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I want to commend the editors for their work so far. It's evident much work has already gone into this article. However, I feel like the volume of work still needed means it is not ready for promotion at this time. Here are my comments:

"British singer-songwriter Gary Barlow, from his debut": remove the comma
"album sessions": "studio sessions" would be clearer
"She had left the song and": remove "had"
" and had chanced upon the demo in 1997": remove "had" and familiarize yourself a bit with the correct usage of the past perfect tense.
"Barlow was apprehensive about releasing the track, but due to contractual obligations he had to release it. The song became Barlow's second consecutive number one release on the UK Singles Chart, following Forever Love", and was certified silver by the British Phonographic Industry (BPI). Elsewhere it received moderate success.": For the sake of chronology, I would start the second paragraph in the lead with these sentences.
"He had also performed the song": remove "had"
The section "Release and reception" should come before "Music video and performance"
The entire "Background" section only as two inline citations, which is not sufficient, especially since a lot of it is things that we have to take the people's word for (like what went on in recording sessions). Try to reference those claims, often at the end of each new fact or sentence.
" Dallas Austin and Nellee Hooper": It would be nice to get some context on who these people are.
"were passed as": Clarify what "passed" means. That is not a common use of that term, and nothing (or something incorrect) will come to mind for most readers
"album Open Road to": commas around Open Road
"manager Simon Fuller chose": commas around Simon Fuller
"Stephen Lipson for producing": "to produce" the song
"with 80s ": 1980s
As I continue to read, I am having some chronology problems: he released the song after releasing the music video? Also, as I review the article, there just aren't enough dates in general. There isn't enough context for the order in which things occurred. Generally, songs are conceived/written, recorded, promoted, released, performed lived, reviewed (reception), then maybe put into a music video--occasionally covered as well. Song articles are usually structured in this order as well. If that order is different here, that is fine, but I really don't know what the order is, because there are no dates.
There is no critical review of the song in this article, which is a major hole.
There is no critical review of the music video and no release dates. A little (referenced) analysis wouldn't hurt either. Perhaps a screencap of a scene?
" he did not have a choice": This is an opinion written in the "Wikipedia voice." It should say "he felt like he didn't have a choice", and I'm assuming that the citation at the end of the sentence matches this information.
"The song reached a peak of ": Try "The song peaked at"
"outside the top-forty ": "Top 40"
Also, under Background, there should be more about the release of the song. Of course dates, formats (which are mentioned below in the track listing section), release in which markets, and any promotion that went on. Also, there should be some mention of which label he was working with.
The charts and track listing sections are all very well referenced.
The reference formatting is superb.
The external link is appropriate
The photo is appropriate and correctly licensed.
Would you consider adding a music sample (10% of the song) to the article?

What is here is very strong, however there just isn't enough. There is need for expansion. I think if you expand this article, it would easily pass its next nomination. If you nominate it again, let me know and I will review it without you having to wait through the whole queue again. Best wishes and happy editing!--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 18:39, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]