| Rate
|
Attribute
|
Review Comment
|
| 1. Well-written:
|
|
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
|
Generally well written and understandable, although I do have some things I noticed.
- Lead
"Jepsen wrote the track with Alex Hope and Nate Cyphert, the former of whom handled the production with SameSame." – replace "the former of whom handled" with something simpler, like "with Hope handling", as it currently feels longer than it can be to me and would match the lead."…what they deemed…" – Not sure why this phrase is included instead of having it describe what they praised, instead of having it why they deemed to have praised.
- I believe that it would be more neutral to have "what they deemed" rather than "many of whom praised it for its catchy and playful lyrics...", it sounds like it's stating that the catchiness or the playfulness of it is a fact. Gained (talk) 06:15, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Saying the latter (to me) sounds like the critics are saying that it is catchy and playful, which would be a fact (unless I'm misreading it). Plus, if the critics say that its catchy and playful, wouldn't their descriptions be describing the song itself?
"…events depicted on the song…" – I think you can do away with “depicted” and replace it with “from”.
- Background and release
"The song was released as the album's second single…" and Its music video, directed by Taylor Fauntleroy… – I think you can combine these two sentences to make it flow. You can use reference 7 for it.
I see what you did, I would recommend reversing the "is set on a seaside filmed in Malibu" to "was filmed in Malibu and is set on a seaside" to separate the behind-the-scenes stuff with the actual video stuff.- Sorry, I misinterpreted that while making the changes; I have changed it to the point you were making. I'll answer the others later. Gained (talk) 05:06, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
”while embarking on her Dedicated Tour” – see below (previously blank by mistake).
- I don't think this is complete.. Gained (talk) 06:15, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yeah, I forgot that in my document while I was using while making this. It was mainly the use of "embarking" to change it to something else such as "going" or removing it with "while on her Dedicated Tour".
"…COVID-19 pandemic, and she transformed…" – replace "and she transformed" to "leading her to transform", as it seems to indicate that because of the pandemic, it led to her doing that."Jepsen announced the album and was preceded…" – replace "album and was preceded" with "album, which was preceded"."Jepsen was inspired to write "Beach House" by someone…" – I feel that "by someone" should be replaced with "after someone", as it is about the experience, from what I can tell. I also feel that "prior to revealing" should be replaced with "…, only to reveal".
- "Only to reveal" sounds a little informal.. Gained (talk) 06:15, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Is informality a problem for you while writing articles? Not a diss, just genuinely asking, as I don't really see a need to be that formal within articles. I am okay with "prior to revealing", so if you choose to not change it, I won't have much problems with it.
- I try to be formal as possible on the articles I edit and I tend look on good or featured articles for reference. Gained (talk) 10:01, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok, good to know. I'll strike this as both essentially say the same thing.
"Jepsen the next day brought the song…" – Replace it with "Jepsen brought the song to a studio session with Alex Hope and Nate Cypher the next day:""The song is listed at track number six…" – Although I did review the source for this and checked it off, I don't really see these types of sentences in single articles.
- I have always been bothered of why editors don't include their track placements on the article, though I understand that it's just trivia. Gained (talk) 06:15, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- To me, it feels a little redundant because of the actual album article that has the track placement, although I can understand why you'd like it within articles, but I do think it is more-so trivia as its inclusion as track six isn't relevant to the song, IMO.
- For me, I generally add them for the readers who don't really know the song or the album and those who only look on the article and nothing else. Gained (talk) 10:01, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- After much thought, I've decided to strike it. Only concern would be the Apple Music reference, but it also has the AllMusic reference.
- Music and lyrics
- "Cyphert, Ben Romans, Bobby Wooten…" – I think you should put something along the lines of “Background vocals were provided by” and then list them.
- "(both played by Hope) with…" – You can remove the parentheses with something along the lines of “both played by Hope, with…
- "Jepsen in the verses describes…" – Replace it with “In the verses, Jepsen describes”.
- "The track also addresses her resentment…" – I feel that it's too long and “resentment” is too strong of a word for what seems to be frustration with dating, so it could be something more like "The track also expresses her frustration with numerous unsuccessful dates…"
"In The A.V. Club, Gabrielle Sanchez wrote…" – You should replace “In The A.V. Club, Gabrielle Sanchez…” with “Gabrielle Sanchez of The A.V. Club…” to match with the other authors of articles.
 Done all
- Critical reception
There’s multiple instances of the word “believe” for describing what the authors have said about the track, is there a reason that this is? I’m thinking that maybe you can get rid of those and say that the authors said or described the song in a certain way.
- Also goes for using the word “wrote” many times, and I think you can instead use “described”, “noting”, and “called”, among other similar words.
- The two above also apply to other sections as well.
- "…with one of its writers Phil de Semlyen…" – I feel that you don’t need “with one of its writers” as he was the one who wrote that part in the entire list.
- "…but found the song so thoroughly written and produced…" – I wonder if there’s a way to rewrite this to not include “so thoroughly”.
”A few of them also found emotional nuance within the lyrics:” – Replace “A few of them” to “Some critics” and replace “thought that” with something like "mentioned" or another similar word, per the same reasoning as the first point in this section.
- Done all except partially for the last point; "A few of them" is referring to the previous critics who said that it was catchy and playful, so I don't there's no need to change it because it has a purpose within the section. Gained (talk) 10:01, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Extra
"SameSame is credited as an additional producer” – Is there a reason why this is a note instead of somewhere like "Personnel"? SameSame is also credited as an additional producer in "Background and release".
- I believe that there's going to be readers who would only look within the prose or the lead, and without the mention, they would receive misinformation that SameSame also handled much of the song's production.
- Could you not only mention him as an additional producer in both personnel and the lead? Like "with Hope handling the production alongside SameSame as an additional producer" or "with Hope handling the production alongside SameSame, who was an additional producer"?
In “Personnel”, I think there should be something to say that it was adapted from some source (such as liner notes), possibly using reference 1.
- I don't think it is needed as the credits are expected to be from the album's liner notes (WP:TRACKLIST), and all of them are already mentioned in the prose with Ref 1 supporting them. Gained (talk) 10:01, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- On an album article, sure, but this is a single article. Looking at another Jepsen GA (Talking to Yourself), it has that note just to say where it came from with the reference as it is a separate section.
|
|
|
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
|
Don't see any inherent problems with the article based on MoS or layout. Don't really see any "words to watch", except if you could count the multiple uses of "believed" (mentioned above). Fiction and list incorporation not needed.
|
| 2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
|
|
|
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
|
Looks good, all references have appropriate information.
|
|
|
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
|
Spot checks will be from these sources via this version:
- 2:
- (a) Source says that Jepsen turned her office into a home studio.
 Y
- (b)
Source says that its a "campy pop anthem", which does verify that some saying it is pop, but I feel that adding more descriptive adjectives to what critics said would be good.  =
- I don't think they can be added as most of them are used in the "Critical reception" section. Gained (talk) 10:01, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- True… I'll strike this since it's already there. Y
- 5: Source states that she teased the song via a tweet in January. Y
- 6: Source states that Jepsen previewed the song on TikTok on August 4, 2022. Y
- 11: Shows that the song reached number 11 on the Billboard Japan charts on August 31, 2022. Y
- 13: Does show that it was released by Interscope and Schoolboy Records on October 21. Y
- 18:
- (a) Source has author calling the track "pop." Y
- (b) Source has author calling the track a "breezy summer anthem", with author mentioned in prose. Y
- 19:
- (a) States that it is "breezy pop". Same things as 2b, but it is described as "breezy" in the critical reception at 19d. Y
- (b) Says that it explores "the ups and downs of trying to find love on dating apps", which correlates to "the uncertain and troubling side of finding love in dating apps." Y
- (c) States that it is "catchy", reference is on the word. Y
- (d) Describes it as "breezy pop." Y
- 20:
- (a) Describes to her "traversing through a series of dating mishaps", which correlates to her "going through a cycle of misfortunes she experienced". Y
- (b) States that Jepsen in the song wants "transparency and honesty" and has the quote from the song. Y
- (c) States that it is an "anthem", which correlates to it being "anthemic". Y
- (d) Source directly states that it is a "dance-ready anthem". Y
- 21:
- (a) Source described the verse, including user use of "Boy No. 1" and "Boy No. I Can't Keep Count Anymore". Y
- (b) Describes her frustration about going on multiple dates and has part of the lyrics included in the article. Y
- (c) Directly states that she "employs her deadpan sense of humor" and that its from an author for The New York Times. Y
- (d)
Maybe I'm just reading this too literally, but I can't see where Zoladz said that it "showcased themes of yearning for a romantic relationship" within the paragraph. Maybe if you can point to how you got thatm I can maybe see what you were trying to do with this part. =
- It's this part on the NY Times article: "Amid all the silliness, though [...] the song effectively taps into the romantic frustration of endless, “Groundhog Day”-esque first dates and long-term singledom". Gained (talk) 10:01, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah, I see now. Y
- 23:
- (a) Author of the article says it;s akn to "Call Me Maybe". Y
- (b) Source has quotes directly from review, and how it was engaging to the author of the article. Y
- 26: Source states that "Beach House" was a "cynical good time". Y
|
|
|
2c. it contains no original research.
|
I don't see any inherent issues with original research.
|
|
|
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
|
I don't see any inherent problems with copyright violations or plagiarism. A run on Earwig (without search engine) shows a "violation unlikely" score. I do wonder if some of the lyrics can be removed with the article just describing them, as well as rewording the critical reception section to rely less on quotes. I'm passing this part, but please tell me if you do decide to reword some stuff.
|
| 3. Broad in its coverage:
|
|
|
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
|
Addresses main aspects of what a single article probably needs, including reception, background and release, and things about the song.
|
|
|
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
|
Generally stays focused on its main aspects, including the song's release, production details, themes, and critical reception.
|
|
|
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
|
Maintains neutral tone. Critical reception gives both positives and negatives and reviews.
|
|
|
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
|
Stable. Has been edited by a couple in the last month, mainly by GA nominator and by others which are relatively minor compared to nominator.
|
| 6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
|
|
|
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
|
Currently has two images:
|
|
|
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
|
Images are relevant to topic (cover of single and singer of single)
|
|
|
7. Overall assessment.
|
With the edits completed, I am going to pass this article. Gained has been a good editor in making these changes as well as helping me understand their reasoning for certain ways of writing.
|
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}