Talk:Obsessed (Olivia Rodrigo song)/GA1

GA Review

Passed. dxneo (talk) 06:17, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Nominator: MaranoFan (talk · contribs) 00:38, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Dxneo (talk · contribs) 04:08, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Thank you for this submission. I will be reviewing this in the next couple of days although I have exams coming up, but I'll take my chances. Let's have fun!

I look forward to it.--N Ø 16:17, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
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, as shown by a source spot-check. a (references): b (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, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Key÷

Queries and suggestions
Quoting from the article

Comments:

Prose:

Lead + quick facts

Background

They wrote over 100 songs. Cross checking with this source, isn't that a figure of speech? If yes, why does it read like they literally wrote over 100 songs for the album?

Looking at the same source, I think it seems to discuss it as a literal figure and not hyperbole. "For Guts, they wrote more than 100 songs - a figure that 'sounds way more impressive than it actually is'" is the quote, which seems to indicate the number actually exceeded 100, at least according to my interpretation. The figure of speech version would probably go "100s of songs".--N Ø 05:32, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cool dxneo (talk) 06:15, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Composition

Critical reception

Commercial performance

"Elsewhere" is a redundant term. I've seen it flagged multiple times while patrolling PR.

Removed.--N Ø 05:32, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Music video

Fascinating stuff. A screenshot from the music video wouldn't hurt.

I feel like people would argue a screenshot doesn't meet the non-free criteria as it would be replaceable with a free picture of a beauty pageant, although actually including a picture of a random beauty pageant would look absurd.--N Ø 05:32, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

True. This is GA and a non-free screenshot is the first thing you notice on this piece. Maybe we might find an image related to the video somewhere. Come to think of it, that is the only standalone article of a music video I've ever seen around here. dxneo (talk) 06:15, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

Clean! No red source detected. I like how they did not leave out the subscription tag on this source.

OR

Plagiarism

Violation unlikely. Earwig finds 15.3% of similarities from an OCC which is one or two quotes.

Broad in its coverage

Neutral

Stable

Last edited almost two weeks ago.

Media files

10% of 2:50 = 17 seconds. The audio file 18 seconds, I believe this happened due to rounding off.

That is correct. If the file is downloaded offline, it's the permissible 17 second duration.--N Ø 05:32, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free cover art is fine and the background and promotion image is also fine and well captioned.

Verdict

Definitely GA material, just waiting for the nominator to address the above mentioned issues. dxneo (talk) 02:54, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to thank the reviewer and I have addressed the issues.--N Ø 05:32, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, not gonna waste my time on changing the icons. I'm passing this Thank you. dxneo (talk) 06:16, 1 August 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.