Talk:Anymore (Goldfrapp song)/GA1

The following discussion 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.

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Aoba47 (talk · contribs) 15:47, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Grabbing this for a review. I will have my comments up by next week by the latest if that is okay with you. Aoba47 (talk) 15:47, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

In the infobox, put CD before digital download for alphabetical order. I would also use "CD single" rather than shortening it to "CD".

Done

I do not think you need "taken from". You can remove the comma and the "taken" to just read "from" for more concise language.

Done

Please reference in the lead how it was released as a CD single as you only mention the digital download release currently.

Done

Link "Critics" in the lead to music criticism. This is the first instance you reference critics in the lead. Unlink it in the second paragraph.

Done

The phrasing here "sings about romance with robotic vocals" sounds a little strange. I would put the "with robotic vocals" part after the verb "sings" to avoid a misreading as a "romance with robotic vocals".

Done

In the phrase "contemporary music critics", the word "contemporary" is not necessary as you do not need to clarify the critics by time period (the song was just released this year so there will not be any other type of critic for this).

Done

In the lead, can you clarify what you mean by "to be too obvious"? I am not sure what you mean by this.

Done

The follow sentence reads a little awkwardly and can be phrased better in my opinion: ( The style of the clip is continued in the succeeding one for "Systemagic", the single that follows "Anymore").

Done

In the first sentence of the "Background and release", please introduce and link Goldfrapp. Otherwise, the reference to "their" album is a little confusing. The body of the article should be treated separately from the lead so don't rely on the lead to set up information for the rest of the article.

Done

Link Mute on its first use in the body of the article.

Done

In the same section, add a sentence about its release on CD.

Done

Switch around References 5 and 6 in the first sentence of the "Composition and lyrics" section.

Done

In the phrase "it has also been described as a synth-pop song", identify who is saying this. I would also move Reference 7 in the sentence to the end or a better place within the sentence as it cuts off the content rather awkwardly in its current state.

Done

In the sentence (The "boomeranging riffs and whistles" found in the song's production was compared to those created by William Orbit for Madonna's 1998 song "Ray of Light".), identify who is making this statement.

Done

Switch around References 14 and 15 in the second sentence of the "Critical reception" section.

Done

In the first sentence of the same section, you mention that the song earned a positive response, but the paragraph includes some mixed comments. Would it be more accurate to say the reception was mixed?

Done – I used "mixed to positive". Carbrera (talk) 21:16, 22 June 2017 (UTC).[reply]

I am still not clear on what "too obvious" means in this context. Does the person the song is too safe/predictable with its sound and/or content? If so, this should be clarified more.

Done

I don't think you need the word "official" in the phrase "An official music video" unless there was an unofficial video that got coverage or notability. Same comment applies for the phrase (The official music video for "Systemagic").

Done

Final comments

Wonderful work with this. Once my comments are addressed, I will pass this. Aoba47 (talk) 19:32, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Aoba47 – Thanks for the review. I might need some additional time to address this review and the one for The Secret Lives of Waldo Kitty. Is that all right with you? Carbrera (talk) 23:41, 17 June 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Take as much time as you need for both. Aoba47 (talk) 22:21, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Aoba47 – I completed addressing your points. Thank you very much. Carbrera (talk) 21:16, 22 June 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Wonderful job with this article. I will ✓ Pass this. Aoba47 (talk) 22:20, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.