Talk:Mine Again

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mine Again article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Mine Again 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
February 21, 2009	Articles for deletion	Redirected
August 30, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on August 20, 2012.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Mariah Carey's song "Mine Again" was nominated at the 2006 Grammy Award ceremony for Best Traditional R&B Performance?

Current status: Good article

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

Mariah Carey Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mariah Carey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mariah Carey 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.Mariah CareyWikipedia:WikiProject Mariah CareyTemplate:WikiProject Mariah CareyMariah Carey articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women in Music

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Beats per minute#Beats per minute|beats per minute]] The anchor (#Beats per minute) has been deleted by other users before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Critical sources

Aaron • ^{You Da One} 23:23, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Thevampireashlee (talk · contribs) 19:13, 29 August 2012 (UTC) This is my second review, and I'm excited to begin.[reply]

Initial comments

I've had a quick look at the article and overall, it appears to meet the GA criteria. The sources are reputable, the lead is sufficient, the structure is well put together, and the coverage appears large. Although not required, an image or a sound clip would definitely improve the scope of this article. Some in-depth comments:

If you need me to load a snippet of the song, I'd be happy to.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 23:00, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- That would be wonderful. Ensure that it's properly licensed and rationalized under fair use. --Thevampireashlee (talk) 23:18, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - That's Aaron's job ;) He just needs to tell me what part of the song he wants, then I'll add a basic rational to which he can elaborate.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 23:22, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a picture of a Grammy Award. AARON• ^TALK

Lead

Neo soul is not a proper noun. Needs to be lower-cased.
Done AARON• ^TALK

Background

What is an "intended comeback"? Did she end up recording this song and album as her comeback instead? It's unclear what was meant by this. And "comeback" seems like. jargon
Because 2000-2002 was a critical failure for her film and music work, Charmbraclet was supposed to be a comeback album, but it didn't do well (better than 'Glitter), so it was, now looking back in hindsight, an intended comeback. AARON• ^TALK
"...from throughout the 1990s..." - "throughout" is redundant.
Done AARON• ^TALK
"Although the album focused on incorporating several inspirational and adult contemporary ballads and re-capturing Carey's audience from throughout the 1990s, critics took notice of Carey's different vocals." - the introductory clause is copiously large, and it reads like a nonparallel sentence.
Done AARON• ^TALK
"As Glitter had been a mixture of 1980s covers and more dance-oriented material, Charmbracelet was void of up-tempo numbers, and harbored on slower, more contemporary melodies." - awkward wording. Try something along the lines of: "As Glitter was an unsuccessful mixture of covers and dance music, Charmbracelet incorporated slower, contemporary melodies."
Done AARON• ^TALK
- As it stands, I'm wondering if the source really supports this notion, or if it's inferred based on how the reader interrupted the text.
I sampled this paragraph from "We Belong Together". AARON• ^TALK
Who said Erlewine's critique was harsh? Surely he didn't say so in his own review. The sentence involving his review is clunking and confusing. Try: "Stephen Thomas Erlewine criticized the album, describing Carey's voice as 'in tatters'." or something similar.
Read it, it's very harsh! AARON• ^TALK
- Oh, I read it, but it's still POV to say it's harsh. Either the word harsh needs a source, or it needs to be removed. It's original research. The sentence also needs to be reworded. It's current state is ambiguous. --Thevampireashlee (talk) 22:50, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Removed. AARON• ^TALK 10:29, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
After this line "He wrote" needs a comma after it.
Done This was fixed. --Thevampireashlee (talk) 22:50, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stopping for now. --Thevampireashlee (talk) 19:13, 29 August 2012 (UTC) Picking this back up...[reply]

Background

Last sentence. "...recorded several songs the album.". The word "for" is missing between the "songs" and "the".
Done AARON• ^TALK

Production and recording

Reads like a forced rehashing of the "Credits". May not be necessary to include at all, unless it can be expanded. Okay for now.
Done a little c/e. AARON• ^TALK

Composition

"Mine Again" is a "old-school". "a" should be "an".
Done AARON• ^TALK
In the following sentence, it reads, "The song's lyrics..." which is redundant. What other lyrics would we be talking about?
Done AARON• ^TALK
"Carey's vocal range in the song span..." - again "in the song" is redundant. "Carey's voice ranges..." or "Carey's vocal range spans" will suffice. If it must stay, the phrase needs to be enclosed in commas, as it's an appositive.
Done AARON• ^TALK
The last sentence needs a comma after the word "lyric".
Done AARON• ^TALK

Critical reception

"...wrote that the song was a Carey's "signature show-off track." either needs to read "...wrote that the song was a Carey 'signature show-off track." or "...wrote that the song was Carey's 'signature show-off track."
Done AARON• ^TALK
Stylus Magazine is the name of published title; it needs italics. So is Slant Magazine.
Stylus Magazine and Slant Magazine are not italicised as they are online webzines, not physically published magazines like Rap-Up. AARON• ^TALK
"Sal Cinguemani for Slant Magazine noted that the songs which do not work well on the album..." this part of the sentence reads awkwardly.
Put into past tense. AARON• ^TALK
Between "Only" and "and" there needs to be a comma, outside of the quotation marks. (Oxford comma).
Done AARON• ^TALK

Accolades - Charts

All is well with these sections.

Overall appraisal

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:
~~The abovementioned prose issues need to be resolved.~~ Resolved

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Good structure. Fits in with MoS.
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:
Verifiable, high quality sources.

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
All contentious statements are sourced.

C. No original research:
~~One instance of original research was noticed under "Background". It will need to be resolved.~~ Fixed
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:
Sufficient coverage for a song this uncommon.

B. Focused:
On topic.
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
~~See the section on original research. The word "harshly", while small, is biased and colors the meaning of the text without being verifiable or accurate.~~
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Stable.
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
One image here. Appears to be used properly.

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Due to the uncommonness of the song, it's difficult to find performances of it that are free to use. It makes good use of the resources at hand.
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

After the abovementioned issues are resolved, I will pass the article. Good work to everyone involved. --Thevampireashlee (talk) 23:18, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. AARON• ^TALK 14:58, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

R&B Airplay

http://www.billboard.com/artist/309388/mariah%2Bcarey/chart?page=1&f=364 — ₳aron 21:03, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mine Again. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:08, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]