Talk:"Heroes" (David Bowie song)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 09:48, 14 June 2022 (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 am going to review this from today onwards, but it may take three days with my work schedule. --K. Peake 09:48, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing Kyle. Appreciate it as always. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 13:55, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox and lead

Replace hlist with bullet points per Template:Infobox song

Done

You should mention what album the song is from in the first sentence
"It was recorded in" → "The song was recorded in"
The release sentence should be the last one of the para, as writing and recording info is earlier stuff
""from his 12th studio album of the same name." → "from the album."

Regarding these four, I modeled the paragraph after Aftermath (Rolling Stones album) and to me it makes sense for flow. I'm also kind of struggling to envision exactly what you're saying for some reason. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:22, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Writing/recording is what led to the creation of the song, so logically it should come before release. Also, I'm not too sure if you should be using an album article as the blueprint for this. --K. Peake 06:19, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How's that look? – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 19:14, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic! --K. Peake 07:03, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pipe synthesiser to Synthesizer

That would make it a WP:SEAOFBLUE situation – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:22, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"one from East and West Berlin." → "one from East Berlin and the other from the West."
"inspired by Bowie's witnessing of a" → "inspired by Bowie witnessing a" to be less wordy

Both done

I don't think the events in his own life are notable for the lead

Are you sure? I included that to solidify the "dark undertones" part (cuz the song really isn't all hopes and dreams like lots think it is), and there's also a whole paragraph in the body devoted to it. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:22, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of inspiration has been mentioned by this point, making the addition seem like overkill. --K. Peake 06:19, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean. Removed that.

Before going into live performances, shouldn't you add a part about the video synopsis?

I mean the video itself is just him against a light backdrop. Also, it's the single edit which I've always hated. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:22, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"versions of the track, titled" → "versions of "'Heroes'", titled"
"the single only peaked at" → "the song only peaked at"
Why are the higher positions than the UK like Australia and Ireland not mentioned?

How would you work it? Like "charted well throughout Europe and Australia but only peaked at..."? – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:22, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe add after the Hot 100, "though reached numbers..." with the respective positions, or something like that. --K. Peake 06:19, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So I put "but reached the top 20 in multiple European countries and Australia." Not sure if I like it but as it stands the third para is already longer than the others and it shouldn't get much longer. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 19:14, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The reception sentence should be the first of the second para instead

Did you mean the third? And how it is now follows the flow of the article. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:22, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that is what I meant, as reception should come before promo info. --K. Peake 06:19, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How about that? – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 19:14, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely better; I take no issue with the release info being next to reception since it was for an edited version anyway. --K. Peake 07:03, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"the song's reputation has grown substantially and is now seen" → "the song has grown substantially in reputation and been seen"
"a version by" → "a version of "'Heroes'" by" and you should mention the critical reception too; if so, split The X Factor part
Mention at least one series and/or film that it appears in

Above three done

Writing and recording

Backing track

Img looks good!
"and heroic" and "I had" → "and heroic" and, "I had" per this being a full sentence quoted
"took place entirely at in" → "took place entirely in"
"a ballroom, and was" → "a ballroom and was"
"returning from Low," → "returning from Station to Station (1976)," with the wikilink, per the source
"lasting over eight minutes." → "lasting eight minutes."
Pipe synthesiser to Synthesizer
"towards the end."" → "towards the end"." per MOS:QUOTE
Pipe ARP Solina to ARP String Ensemble
A citation should be at the end of the first sentence of the fourth para per usage of a quote
Wikilink bassline
Pipe register to Register (music)

All done, easy peasy

Vocals

Img looks good!
"but he and Visconti departed." → "but he and Visconti had departed." or anything else that specifies clearly
"he requested Visconti leave" → "Bowie requested Visconti leave"

Both done

Composition

Music

Img looks good!
Wikilink chord progression
"The song in mainly in the" → "The song is mainly in the"
"from the parallel minor, D minor, back" → "from the parallel D minor back"
Pipe percussion to Percussion instrument
"finds it a" → "finds the song a"
"are both dastardly," turning into a" → "are both dastardly", turning into a" per MOS:QUOTE
Add the release year of "I'm Waiting for the Man"

All done

Lyrics

"of Berlin Bowie lived in" → "of Berlin that Bowie lived in"
"that separate the third verse," → "separating the third verse,"
Wikilink octave
"the sense that the narrator's love" → "the sense the narrator's love" to avoid overusage of that
"pleasure of being alive."" → "pleasure of being alive"." per MOS:QUOTE
"Likewise, Pegg contests that the song contains" → "Likewise, Pegg contests the song contains"
"the repeated announcement that" → "the repeated announcement of"
Add the release year of "The Bewlay Brothers" in brackets
"themes of his earlier works" → "themes of Bowie's earlier works"
"during World War II, also provided" → "during World War II, provided" to avoid using also twice in one sentence
Wikilink alcoholism
Pipe folk to Folk music

All done

Promotion and release

Pipe Granada Television to ITV Granada
Wikilink 7" per MOS:LINK2SECT
Remove the comma after television special
"On 19 October," → "On 19 October 1977,"
"using a new backing track by Bowie," → "using a new backing track by the artist," to avoid using his name twice in one sentence
Pipe 12" single to Twelve-inch single
"it was sequenced as" → "the song was sequenced as" or something similar, as this is about the song not necessarily that version
Remove overly obvious wikilink on Paris
Pipe wet dream to Nocturnal emission
"reaching a low 126" → "reaching a low number 126"
Remove comma after (9)

Above done

The Best of David Bowie 1974/1979 is not sourced as including the song

Wrong link, went to the 69/74 comp. Fixed the link – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:22, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Remove comma after Nothing Has Changed

Done

Question for you: I think I need to add a picture in this section as it's kind of blank. Thinking a dual pic of Bolan and Crosby what do you think? – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:22, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I never picked up on this until you said it, but the section is a bit too blank and yes a pic of them would be appropriate. --K. Peake 06:19, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thought so. Added. I thought about doing an NF image of the MV but I wouldn't have a rationale so this will suffice. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 19:35, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Critical reception

"Several welcomed it as" → "Several welcomed the song as"
"also considered it a" → "also considered the song a"
"despite the dreariness of the album as" → "despite the dreariness of "Heroes" as"

All done

Retrospective appraisal

Quote box looks good!
Wikilink rock and roll
"described it as" → "described "'Heroes'" as"
"despite that fact."" → "despite that fact"." per MOS:QUOTE

Above three done

[4][5][10][11][15][59] is too many refs together; move some around to fix this, probably a few to after "as a classic"

Or make it similar to a page like The Empire Strikes Back? – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:22, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the cast section of that article gives a proper model to follow here. --K. Peake 06:19, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"wrote that it" → "wrote that the song"

Hopefully we're not saying "song" too much... – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:22, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ironically, this is to avoid overusage of "it", although you could use the track instead if you want? --K. Peake 06:19, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

More ironically, I use "it" so we're not saying "song" so much xP – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 19:35, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"spirit over adversity."" → "spirit over adversity"."
"for the spirit."" → "for the spirit"."
"they mostly pan the" → "the biographers mostly pan the"

Above three done

[4][5][10][15][59] is too many refs together again; move some around like I suggested on the previous instance

Made it like the above – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:22, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pipe Uncut to Uncut (magazine)
Add the release year of "Life on Mars?" in brackets
"He recognised it as a" → "He recognised the track as a"

Above three done

Accolades

[72][73][74][75][76] is too many refs together again; obviously, move them to being after the publications to fix this

Made it like the others – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:22, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"the song has placed at" → "the song has been placed at"
A position of number 36 is listed for Q, not 34
"and later moved up to" → "later moving the song up to"
TIME should not be capitalised
The Radio X source gives a position of number 12, not number 24

Above five corrected

Are you sure Acclaimed Music is a reliable source?

I've used it for FAs and they've passed so yeah it should be fine. It's just an aggregate website like Rotten Tomatoes or Metacritic. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:22, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Later chart success

"It spent two weeks on" → "The song spent two weeks on"
[92][93] shouldn't these be the other way round to correspond with the countries?
Remove comma after the Netherlands chart position

All fixed

Live performances

"the latter appear on that tour's" → "the latter appeared on its"
"made subsequently appearances during" → "made subsequent appearances during"
Pipe acoustic to Acoustic music
"Also sang at his" → "The song was also sang at his"

All done

Cover versions and tributes

Img looks good!
Some of these covers still need significant info added; elsewise remove them per WP:SONGCOVER

They're all sourced by Pegg. He obviously lists a lot more but I picked out some of the more major ones, doing something similar for Life on Mars?. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:22, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You missed my point; I wasn't disputing if they are sourced or not, but rather if they have the notability to pass the guideline. --K. Peake 06:19, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They probably don't the more I think about it. Able to confirm a few but removed all the ones I couldn't. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 19:35, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pipe Modern Rock Tracks to Alternative Airplay
Pipe Hot 100 Airplay to Radio Songs (chart)
"Top 40 Mainstream chart." → "Mainstream Top 40 chart." with the wikilink
"but noting that lead singer" → "but noting the lead singer"
Wikilink CD single
"from planet earth."" → "from planet earth"." per MOS:QUOTE
Pipe German Foreign Office to Federal Foreign Office
"with Dave Gahan stating, "Bowie" → "with Gahan stating, "Bowie"

Above done

The song is not sourced as being added to King Crimson's set in 2000

That part is sourced by Pegg, which I fixed – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:22, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Usage in media

The medal ceremonies part is not sourced

Removed as checking out this it might have been OR from before expansion – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:22, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Remove excess space after The Parole Officer.

Oops, done

Make sure you add the years of any media appearances

Unfortunately don't have the years for TV shows as Pegg doesn't specify – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:22, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Apart from a where Wiki article leads to a show with the year listed, then you can. --K. Peake 06:19, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done

[5] should only be invoked at the end of the sentence
Pipe Praia do Futuro to Futuro Beach
Remove the release year in brackets for Jojo Rabbit because it is already introduced as five years later

Above three done

Personnel

Pipe ARP Solina String Ensemble to ARP String Ensemble

Done

Charts and certifications

David Bowie version

Weekly charts

Place Record World in brackets for the US chart
Wikilink Euro Digital Song Sales per MOS:LINK2SECT

Certifications

Good

The Wallflowers version

Good

References

Does note d really need the ref when that is invoked at the end of the actual sentence?

Done

Copyvio score looks slightly too high at 42.5%; cut down the amount of direct quoting from Radio X to fix this

The link won't load for me rn but looking at the source list, Radio X must have the same quotes as some of the other refs because I'm not finding a any direct quote from them in the article itself. Most quotes are from books so I'm assuming the website used the same ones? – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 18:23, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fix MOS:QWQ issues with refs 18, 47 and 128

Done

Why do refs 20 and 41 cite Davidbowie.com while ref 33 cites David Bowie official website?

Made consistent

Pipe Record Research Inc to Joel Whitburn on ref 26
Wikilink AllMusic and author-link Stephen Thomas Erlewine on ref 34
Pipe Pitchfork to Pitchfork (website) on ref 40
Wikilink NME on ref 48
Italicise NME in the titles of refs 49 and 80

Above done

For refs 49, 68, 72, 74, 75, 76 and 77, are you sure rocklist.net is a reliable source? Also, magazine names should be italicised in titles too.

This was also brought up at Talk:This Year's Model/GA1. I don't have access to any of these lists (although I did find the NME one online so I corrected that) other than through this website, which is typically redirected from Acclaimed Music. I know some of them have the issues and dates which helps but since there's no online archives of these there's really no way for me to properly cite these other than here (other editors have told me the British Library houses Melody Maker but I live in the US so that doesn't help me rn). So basically, I only link them to rocklist.net so there's easier verification as I have no way of obtaining the actual magazines themselves. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 18:20, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Remove wikilink on AllMusic for ref 52

Done

Remove pipe on Pitchfork ref 53 and I'm not sure if this has MOS:QWQ issues or not with the speech marks being italicised

Done and no it doesn't; it's the album title

Ref 59 cites pp. 280-282, so couldn't this be used in place of ref 25?
Pipe Uncut to Uncut (magazine) on ref 65
Cite Digital Spy as publisher instead on ref 67
Remove wikilink on NME for ref 69

Above four done

I am unsure about the reliability of Acclaimed Music on ref 71 and cite it as publisher if kept

I've used it for other articles, including ones that became featured. It's basically similar to Rotten Tomatoes or Metacritic – it's just a aggregate website that compiles best-of lists. Super helpful – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 14:56, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Should be passable then, unless something comes up showing it to be unreliable. --K. Peake 16:24, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pipe Q to Q (magazine) on ref 75
Fix MOS:CAPS issues with ref 81; do the same for Time and pipe to Time (magazine)
Remove pipe on Pitchfork for ref 82 and italicised The Pitchfork 500
Wikilink National Review on ref 87
Official Charts → Official Charts Company on ref 89, citing as publisher instead
Cite Billboard Japan as work/website instead on ref 97 with the wikilink
Cite portuguesecharts.com as publisher instead on ref 100, removing Hung Medien
Cite Lescharts.com as publisher instead on ref 107
Remove author-link on Stephen Thomas Erlewine on ref 108

Above done

Pipe Parlophone to Parlophone Records on ref 110

Just Parlophone as that's a redirect – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 14:56, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Silly me; should've checked! --K. Peake 16:24, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Remove pipe on Pitchfork for ref 116
WP:OVERLINK of Official Charts Company on ref 123
Cite MarketWatch as publisher instead on ref 127 with the wikilink
WP:OVERLINK of The New York Times on ref 131
Pipe Salon to Salon.com and fix MOS:QWQ issues on ref 133

Above done

Sources

Wikilink Omnibus Press
Pipe Eel Pie Pub to Eel Pie Publishing

Both done

Final comments and verdict

On hold until all of the issues are fixed; that review went at my ideal pace! --K. Peake 08:34, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Kyle Peake Thanks for reviewing Kyle. I have some replies above I'd like you to check out but other than that I've responded to everything. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 18:24, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kyle Peake Think that's everything. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 19:35, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Pass now and regarding the copyright, it appears that Radio X coincedentally uses book quotes, so there's no real violation! --K. Peake 07:03, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]