This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electronic music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electronic music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Electronic musicWikipedia:WikiProject Electronic musicTemplate:WikiProject Electronic musicelectronic music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Bang (Rita Ora and Imanbek EP) is part of the WikiProject Albania, an attempt to co-ordinate articles relating to Albania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page so as to become familiar with the guidelines. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.AlbaniaWikipedia:WikiProject AlbaniaTemplate:WikiProject AlbaniaAlbania articles
Bang (Rita Ora and Imanbek EP) is part of WikiProject Central Asia, a project to improve all Central Asia-related articles. This includes but is not limited to Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Tibet, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Xinjiang and Central Asian portions of Iran, Pakistan and Russia, region-specific topics, and anything else related to Central Asia. If you would like to help improve this and other Central Asia-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.Central AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Central AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Central AsiaCentral Asia articles
Bang (Rita Ora and Imanbek EP) is part of WikiProject Kosovo, an attempt to co-ordinate articles relating to Kosovo on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page so as to become familiar with the guidelines. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.KosovoWikipedia:WikiProject KosovoTemplate:WikiProject KosovoKosovo articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music articles
A fact from Bang (Rita Ora and Imanbek EP) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 31 March 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that British singer Rita Ora and Kazakh DJ Imanbek collaborated with translators over videotelephony software Zoom to record their collaborative EP Bang?
"reached number 16 on the American Billboard Top Dance/Electronic Albums chart" - shouldn't it be "Billboard's Top Dance/Electronic Albums chart"? "Billboard" isn't part of record chart name. The same for section "Reception and promotion". Eurohunter (talk) 21:33, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"it commemorates the moment of having a good time and memories of crazy nights" - is this possible to explain what "crazy nights" mean? Eurohunter (talk) 21:33, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would try to incorporate descriptions of what was said than direct quotes of reviews and same for section "Reception and promotion". Eurohunter (talk) 21:33, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Commercially, Bang reached number 16 on the US Billboard Top Dance/Electronic Albums ranking in the issue dated 27 February 2021." - it charted just one week and from this sentence I would expect a few weeks. Eurohunter (talk) 21:33, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
They are based on Tidal releases but are they the exclusive releases or would it be possible to exchange references to the same releases but to a more open platform? Tidal requires log in to see anything. The other solution is to try to find archived version. Eurohunter (talk) 21:33, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Replace parameter "Work" or "Publisher" with "Website" in references. Names should be linked to existing articles but not all of them are linked. Eurohunter (talk) 21:38, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Iaof2017: For example, there is no link to Billboard in reference 27 etc. You can add "?l=en-GB" to url at the end of references to Apple Music to force English version. Eurohunter (talk) 17:05, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Iaof2017: there are two items here that have not been crossed off or responded to, "I would try to incorporate descriptions of what..." and "For example, there is no link to Billboard in reference 27...". Are these items you feel that you are looking to address, or do you feel they are not currently actionable/relevant? Best, CMD (talk) 12:39, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hey @Chipmunkdavis:, I hope you're well. Thank you for your diligence and attention in taking the review. In response to the concerns regarding the two points, I've nominated several articles for GA status in the past and have successfully seen them through the process. While I respect the suggestions, I believe that these specific items might not be necessary. I believe that the article, as it stands, provides a clear and informative description of the subject matter. I have addressed the major points that the previous editor raised and made necessary improvements to the article to ensure its quality. I hope you can understand my perspective and may find the article in its current form appropriate for GA status. However, I appreciate your commitment and thanks again. Best regards! Iaof2017 (talk) 15:13, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi DannyMusicEditor, the issue here is that the original reviewer did not complete the review. It has undergone what appears to be a prose review with some inquiries regarding broadness, so perhaps it just needs some source checks and a second overall eye to affirm neutrality and broadness (there is only one media file and it is non-free fair use). CMD (talk) 03:35, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, it's a 4-track EP with modest chart placement, I think this is pretty good for coverage considering that fact. Some of these requests are not reasonable as being "required" for passing, in fact. An audio sample is recommended, but not required for GA. The original reviewer has quite a bit of experience working in electronic dance music, which frequently releases singles and EPs in exclusive formats and editions for different nations but does not necessarily translate as common for all music, even pop like Ms. Ora. Reference formatting being consistent is not a GA criterion.
That being said, there are some things that still need fixing. "Billingual" is a typo. I understand the information on the languages is sourced, but agree the language should be provided in Wikipedia's text. Likewise, is "own unique capacity for mainstream appeal" necessary, or can this be prosified? That's really the only one I could see being changed, though.
Finally, two questions of my own. You have a review from Mix1 in critical reception in a review box, but it is not discussed in critical reception. Any source used in critical reception ought to actually be used in a GA's commentary of the project, though I am presuming maybe this is because of language difficulty with German? (nevermind, you live in Germany) Finally, Gunna and Khea should be linked in the tracklists. These are exempt to overlinks the first time they appear in the track listing. dannymusiceditoroops03:59, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @DannyMusicEditor: and @Chipmunkdavis: hope you guys are well, I appreciate your efforts in reviewing this article. I fixed the two main points mentioned by DannyMusicEditor. I'm having some difficulty to fully understand the statement about the "sources used in critical reception" section, could you possibly be more specific in your explanation? Thanks Iaof2017 (talk) 18:09, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Iaof2017: That point was just an explanation of why I expected Mix1 to be in the text. If a publication is inside a review box, I'd expect some inclusion of the reference in the prose of critical reception. Is there anything you could glean from the Mix1 source other than the score? I would prefer if something was added from a review standpoint if there's anything suitable, though I have not yet looked at the link myself. Other than that minor point, I would be happy to pass the article in the original reviewer's stead granted their apparent abandonment of the review. Also, I've noticed that "Big" should be linked the first time it appears in the tracklist (again, overlink exempt), and as the track list stands now, Khea appears in different songs dependent on the original or acoustic version of the EP; is this intentional or a mistake? If intentional please ignore me there. dannymusiceditoroops01:27, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
