Jump to content

Talk:Welcome to New York (song)/GA1

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

GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 15:17, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

I will take this on soon to help you in getting a large number of GAs for Taylor Swift. --K. Peake 15:17, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox and lead

[edit]
  • Infobox looks good
  • "for her fifth studio album" → "for her fifth studio album,"
  • "Written and produced by" → "The song was written and produced by both" since the writing/production and comp/lyrics should be in different sentences to move the lead to the correct order
  • The release sentence should be directly after the writing/production one
  • "the synth-pop song equipped with pulsating synthesizers explores" → "A synth-pop song equipped with pulsating synthesizers, it explores" as a separate sentence
  • "as a promotional single for 1989 through" → "as the album's second promotional single, through" with the target
  • "Contemporary critics criticized the song's lyrics," → "Contemporary music critics criticized the lyrics of "Welcome to New York"," with the target
  • If it was something like guitar or piano then your statement would hold water, but this is targeting music critics to the relevant article. Also, you should mention the song's title as instructed because reading "the song" twice in the same sentence is very awkward --K. Peake 07:04, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "lacked substance compared to" → "lacks substance compared to"
  • "A few others" → "A number of others"
  • "equality, and praised" → "equality, and some critics praised"
  • "It reached the" → "The song reached the"
  • Target New Zealand Singles Chart to Official New Zealand Music Chart
  • "the top 20 on charts" → "the top 20 of the charts"
  • ""Welcome to New York" reached" → "the song reached"

Background and development

[edit]
  • "and incorporate a straightforward" → "and incorporate straightforward"
  • "for her fifth studio album," → "for her fifth studio album"
  • Remove target on 1989
  • "headlining world tour in support" → "headlining world tour of the same name in support" to specify it is The Red Tour, or maybe a different wording that makes this clear if the one suggested seems confusing or awkward to you?
  • Add release year of Red in brackets
  • "for the album's conception," → "for 1989's conception,"
  • "To this end," → "To this endlessness,"

Production and composition

[edit]
  • Audio sample text looks great but you should add refs to it despite the info already being sourced in prose, since the prompted part is only mentioned in the previous section's prose
  • "lyrics and approached Tedder" → "lyrics, before approaching Tedder"
  • Target programming to Programming (music)
  • Remove wikilink on synthesizer
  • "the producers of the song were Tedder, Swift, and" → "the song was produced by Swift, Tedder, and" since that is the order given in the infobox
  • "and was" → "it was"
  • "It was mastered" → "The song was mastered"
  • Target Sterling Sound Studio to Sterling Sound Studios per MOS:LINK2SECT
  • The opening track info belongs in the release and commercial performance section instead as the third sentence of the first para, also mention the date it was released as the opening track on the album
  •  Not done Placing it here will link to the fact that some critics appreciated its role as an opening track that sets the tone for the album in the "Critical reception" section, (talk) 04:14, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "It is a bright" → ""Welcome to New York" is a bright"
  • "length of three minutes and thirty-two seconds (3:32)." → "length of 3:32."
  • "dramatize failed relationships," → "dramatizes failed relationships,"
  • "viewed the lines" → "viewed the lyrics"
  •  Done all except where noted

Critical reception

[edit]
  • Img should be in the live performances and other usage section instead, plus a full-stop is needed at the end of the text
  • "received mixed reviews from contemporary critics," → "was met with mixed reviews from contemporary music critics," with the target
  •  Not done
  • @Hanif Al Husaini: technically, yes, it should be properly written out as PopMatters's and Adams's. Since some editors may find this confusing, however, I'd change to something else, (talk) 04:14, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Release and commercial performance

[edit]

Live performances and other usage

[edit]
  • 1989 Secret Sessions should not be surrounded by speech marks
  • "of the promotion of 1989," → "of the promotion for the album,"
  • "on televised shows including" → "on televised shows, including"
  • Target acoustic to Acoustic music
  • "for his album" → "for his 15th studio album"

Credits and personnel

[edit]

Charts

[edit]
  • Per usage The main usage case is when a table is placed immediately below a heading, where the heading is effectively identical to the table's caption. Caption and heading are identical in this case, (talk) 09:08, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Certifications

[edit]
  • See MOS:TABLECAPTION

References

[edit]
  • Copyvio score looks decent at 31.0%; ignore the higher scores since none of those sources appear in this article
  • Make sure all of these are archived by using the tool
  • Ref 4 is a duplicate of ref 1
  • Cite E! Online as work/website instead for ref 5
  • Same as above for American Top 40 on ref 6
  • WP:OVERLINK of Taylor Swift on ref 9
  • Fix MOS:QWQ issues with ref 10
  • WP:OVERLINK of Time on refs 19 and 20
  • Remove or replace ref 23 per WP:SELFPUB
  • WP:OVERLINK of Entertainment Weekly on ref 24
  • WP:OVERLINK of Billboard on refs 26, 31 and 44
  • Ref 33 is useless, as you can invoke the certification from the table in the release and commercial performance section instead by using a refname
  • Cite Yahoo! as publisher instead for ref 47
  • WP:OVERLINK of The A.V. Club on ref 48
  • WP:OVERLINK of Consequence of Sound on ref 49
  • Per WP:OVERLINK: Citations stand alone in their usage, so there is no problem with repeating the same link in many citations within an article; e.g. |work=[[The Guardian]].

Final comments and verdict

[edit]
  •  On hold after reviewing in less than 24 hours, though do not feel to clarify with me if you are unsure about implementing any changes like you did during the first stage! --K. Peake 13:40, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nice timing with the response, though you have missed some points which I have pointed out above after doing some brief copy editing and why has the smartphone mentioned been removed? --K. Peake 08:02, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Responded as above... pretty sure I removed smartphone by mistake, but shouldn't it be left like that because it's a fairly common term? (talk) 08:11, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Still a few fixes left, which I have pointed out just now above (though the charts and certifications captions still need to be added too). Also, it is fine to wikilink that because it is not as common as the actual term phone. --K. Peake 08:34, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A little back and forth, but we solved any differences in the end.  Pass for this article now! --K. Peake 09:29, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]