Talk:Still Jennifer Lopez/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Tomica (talk · contribs) 13:49, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why is mandarin in capital letter? — Tomíca^(T2ME) 22:22, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The fragrance captivates the mature, elegant side of Lopez and was aimed at a female demographic ---> This doesn't read neutral, it's more like a review. Please copy-edited it a bit. — Tomíca^(T2ME) 22:22, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Why are there references in the lead? Isn't the information already in the body of the article? — Tomíca^(T2ME) 22:22, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed everything. However I was told that Mandarin should be capatilized beccause of being named after Mandarin China (or something, not sure). Fixed it anyway, it did look odd. — Ar re 04:57, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

in America ---> in the United States. — Tomíca^(T2ME) 22:22, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
was then released ---> remove then. — Tomíca^(T2ME) 22:22, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
While Glow by JLo was aimed at the female market at girls between the age of 15 and 25, Still Jennifer Lopez was aimed to appeal to an older demographic of females 25 and above ---> According to who? Press release, a reviewer, JLO herself? — Tomíca^(T2ME) 22:22, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The rest is fine. — Tomíca^(T2ME) 22:22, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done — Ar re 04:57, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Everything is good, except the issue with the Mandarin, already mentioned in the lead. — Tomíca^(T2ME) 22:28, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done — Ar re 04:57, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since promotion and response are small paragraphs, why don't you merge them under 'Release' and make them separate, however, under that section. — Tomíca^(T2ME) 22:28, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done — Ar re 04:57, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I read the rest of the article. Everything is good... passing the article. — Tomíca^(T2ME) 17:13, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou so much Tomica, for the review. :) — Ar re 03:47, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]