Jump to content

Talk:Street Lights (Kanye West song)/GA1

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

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Zmbro (talk · contribs) 23:10, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


I'd be happy to check this out this weekend. :-) – zmbro (talk) 23:10, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox and lead

[edit]
  • Has the song been stylized as one word enough to warrant it mentioned here? (i.e. "Foxey Lady" vs. "Foxy Lady") If yes, add quotes around it.
  • Should Mr Hudson be included as a producer in the infobox?
  • Maybe combine the the inspiration and lyric sentences into one? Seems repetitive to say "inspired by street lights" then "references street lights"

Background

[edit]
  • "West has often used the word "light" or the plural version of it in his song titles," ain't that the truth lol
  • Going along with the "lights" theme, it personally feels out of place to mention every song he's recorded with "light" in the title, since, save for "All of the Lights", most of them don't specifically relate to "Street Lights".
  • Move the final sentence about the recording period up to the first para or the start of the second. Feels very out of place at the end.

Composition and lyrics

[edit]
  • Bhasker is one of West's regular collaborators right? Maybe mention that?
  • Mention that West uses Auto-tune on the entire album here: "Like the rest of its parent album, Auto-Tune is heavily deployed..." (use an extra source if necessary)
  • "After the minute-and-a-half point of the song" → "After the minute-and-a-half point"

Release and reception

[edit]
  • "Jody Rosen of Rolling Stone commented that the song features "a haze of distortion" floating over "tolling keyboard chords and a hammering beat"." I would move this to composition, as it doesn't give an opinion on whether it's good or bad compared to other reviews
  • This being moved would be useless, as I have already mentioned the distortion and keyboards in comp. Also, terms like "haze" and "hammering" to add to reception imo. --K. Peake 20:46, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The entire second para is from one reviewer; seems super excessive
  • This was a reviewer that heavily focused on the song though; there are no issues with overquoting so I don't think this should be a problem because otherwise it would be cherrypicking certain parts of the review. --K. Peake 20:46, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Both reviewers for Washington Post and IGN single out "Street Lights" as worthy of download, yet they're two paras apart. I would put a period after "digital shadow" then say something like: "Both Richards and Alfred H. Leonard, III of IGN listed the song among the ones on 808s & Heartbreak that are worthy of downloading." (flows easier and makes it seem less disjointed)
  •  Not done I have organized the info by thematic element; IGN coming before PopMatters would not make sense due to the latter writing about the comp. --K. Peake 20:46, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Add "The song did receive some negative reviews." before the Slant one
  •  Comment: Is this really needed when I use negative identification to begin that sentence and then write "dismissive" around the start of the following one? --K. Peake 20:46, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Music video and promotion

[edit]
  • Can that image be brightened? So dark you can barely see him
  •  Comment: This is of the orchestra rather than West himself, also is there a way to brighten existing images or do you need to re-upload? --K. Peake 07:00, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "During his show for VH1 in February 2009, West delivered a performance of the song." → "West performed the song during a show for VH1 in February 2009."
  • "West's performance of "Street Lights" was" → "Instead, it was"
  • It being "the 20th number" isn't that important
  • "he performed the song as the eighth track of his set." again seems irrelevant; also kinda obvious since it is track 8 on the album
  •  Not done It's not irrelevant when there is 12 tracks, plus I kept the placement so it's clear the album was performed in release order; see Talk: Welcome to Heartbreak/GA1
  • "This marked West's first performance of the song since November 2013;" ditch this here and move it prior to the 2015 shows

Appearances in media

[edit]
  •  Comment: This is not specified by the source, although it was used for season 5; should I just keep this unspecified because adding would be WP:OR or do you want me to remove it altogether? --K. Peake 08:12, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah I guess that would be OR, although that brings the question why the source wouldn't specify in the first place. I would keep it, as I imagine a Grey's fan showing up later on and thinking "iT WaS iN tHE sHoW". – zmbro (talk) 19:09, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is having VHR in parens relevant here?
  • "soundtrack, being set" → "soundtrack set"
  • " stripped-down acoustic rendition of the song." → " stripped-down acoustic rendition of "Street Lights"."

Cover versions

[edit]
  • First and foremost, do any of these listed qualify for WP:SONGCOVER? None of these appear to have been released as singles, charted, or (based on the text) got much attention.
  • Now that you point that out that makes sense. Since these are all covered by RSs they do warrant inclusion. Whole section looks good, just wanted to clear that up first. – zmbro (talk) 22:00, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Credits and personnel

[edit]
  • Looks good

References

[edit]
  • What happened to that copyvio detector that used to be here?
  • Is No Ripcord an RS?
  • Is having a location necessary on ref 20?
  • No author on ref 21?
  • Is Earmilk an RS?
  • It's a music publication that has been around since the early 2000s and has writers across North America, so I do believe it is fully reliable and shouldn't need to be questioned at the talk page. --K. Peake 20:33, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]
  • What is "Streetcar" and why is it here?

Final thoughts

[edit]
Zmbro I have now gone over the remaining concerns after my initial response! --K. Peake 20:33, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]