Talk:West Coast (Lana Del Rey song)/GA1
GA Review
[edit]- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Carbrera (talk · contribs) 23:47, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I am Carbrera, and I'll be reviewing this article for possible good article submission.
Full review coming very soon. Carbrera (talk) 23:47, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Infobox
[edit]- Nothing to add here!
Lead
[edit]Paragraph 1
[edit]- What do you mean by a more "sinister tone" compared to previous songs; I only see one critics that called her vocals "sinister" so perhaps this could be reworded to describe the opinions of multiple critics instead of just one?
- Look below for my comments regarding the linking of "the West Coast of the United States" please
Paragraph 2
[edit]- A lot of your sentences in this section start off with a "[verb + ing] ... [song title]" proceeded by some information of the song; I would really appreciate if this use wouldn't be so repetitive.
- Everything else is good
Paragraph 3
[edit]Nothing.
Background
[edit]Paragraph 1
[edit]- Why is "initially" used in the lead sentence? Did the writer switch hand sometime during the writing process of the song? If not, please remove this from the sentence
- The "West Coast of the United States" sounds so formal; could it instead read "the United States' West Coast?" Let me know what you think of this
- The rest of this section is good
Composition
[edit]Paragraph 1
[edit]- The audio sample's summary it a bit long, and it features the use of "its" twice so it may sound a bit repetitive to some; if you think it's fine than I guess you can leave it (it's not mandatory)
Paragraph 2
[edit]- "Incorporating an ease to her vocal delivery, Del Rey croons..." → "Del Rey eased her vocal delivery by crooning..."
- "In addition, her vocal uses a..." → "In addition, her vocals use a..."
Paragraph 3
[edit]- "Del Rey's formula"? Could this be changed to something like "style" or "sound"?
Paragraph 4
[edit]- "its lyrics" → "the lyrics"
- The rest is really good! :)
Release
[edit]- Nothing, very impressive!
Critical reception
[edit]Paragraph 1
[edit]- You could include a link to "contemporary music critics" here
Recognition
[edit]- I would place The Village Voice's accolade towards the end of the section since it's ranked lower than the other ones mentioned, but that's just my personal preference of course
Commercial performance
[edit]Paragraph 1
[edit]- "actively promoted..." → "heavily promoted..."
Paragraph 3
[edit]- "ending April 26, 2014. It consequently became Del Rey's..." → "ending April 26, 2014; it consequently became Del Rey's..."
Music video
[edit]- The synopsis is very good
- I would add "music video" after "Beyonce's..."
Live performances
[edit]Paragraph 1
[edit]- Could you switch "gig" out for a different word with a similar meaning? Gig doesn't sound necessarily right in the mentioned context; let me know what you decide to do with this
Paragraph 3
[edit]- What is "kohl-smudged eye makeup"? Coal?
Cover versions
[edit]- This section is relatively small and short; could you add on to the cover versions listed? Perhaps say if anything is different about them, any lengthening occurred, etc.??
Credits and personnel
[edit]- You could put a "colspan" on this if you wanted so it's more condense
References
[edit]- Fantastic job! Double check that only one source links to the correct information per WP:OVERLINK; thanks
- [142] - Needs a title, author, date, access date, etc....
End of GA Review:
[edit]This article is fantastic! It definitely deserves to be promoted to GA status! However, some changes need to make first. After the fixes, I'm sure it'll pass. Thanks so much! Carbrera (talk) 23:25, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- No changes have been made to this article and I see that the nominator has been on a long term break; I'm afraid I will be failing this article. However, once the nominator returns, feel free to re-nominate the article for further consideration; thanks! Carbrera (talk) 00:54, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Carbrera: See this diff. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:44, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
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.