Talk:Cannibal (EP)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Calvin999 (talk · contribs) 18:20, 9 March 2012 (UTC) Hello, I will be reviewing this article.[reply]

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Can you use a Done or Not done against comments please.

Infobox

Resolved comments

Use {{duration|m=31|s=59}} Done
Can you provide an alt= caption for the artwork. Done

Lead

Resolved comments

Originally the record was → Put a comma after "Originally" Done
to only be released → The use of "only" doesn't make sense here. Done
such as Dr. Luke, as the executive producer, → such as the executive producer Dr. Luke Done
Critical reception of the album has been generally positive. A common complaint amongst critics was the overuse of Auto-Tune, while the album's production was generally highlighted. → This doesn't read write. You say it was positive, then say how there was a common complaint. ✗ Not done
Yes it does, just because something is positive doesn't mean it didn't receive critiques; the album overall has a score of 73/100, so for every 7 positive there's about 3 negative issues.
Well for me it doesn't flow. Aaron • ^{You Da One}
Okay. I'll leave this one. Aaron • ^{You Da One}
Critical reception of the album has been generally positive. → Cannibal garnered positive reviews from music critics. ✗ Not done
I avoid using that phase because the word "generally" helps to keep the article neutral. The above implies that there was zero mixed or negative reviews.
The use what I suggested, and add "generally". Aaron • ^{You Da One}
I combined both for an equilibrium. Aaron • ^{You Da One}
A common complaint amongst critics → However, a common complaint was Done
I did a slight c/e on two words.

Background and development

Resolved comments

Kesha recorded the abundance of Cannibal over a two week span with a variety of producers because she was on a time crunch and was only available to record the album for those two weeks in September. → This reads like a fan has written it. Done
During an interview with Billboard → With who? And why is Billboard not linked? Done
Kesha worked with similar → "similar" isn't the right word here. Similar producers? What makes them similar to her debut album? Done
Unlike her debut album though, Kesha enlisted the help of producer Bangladesh. → Source? Done

Composition

Resolved comments

"Cannibal" makes use of synth → Link "synth" Done
maneater → Link perhaps, as some people might not know what this means. Done
The album's title track, "Cannibal" makes use of synth and dance driven backings with Kesha singing about maneater tendencies and makes a reference to serial-killer, Jeffrey Dahmer. → Source? Done
The song is more dominantly an electro infused track that uses a synth beat backing. → Source? It helps if your provide a citation at the end of each sentence. Done
She raps over a thundering bass line and ticking beat backing, while speaking about telling off rich guys trying to hit on her and buy her attention. → Source? Also, think you could write "telling off rich guys trying to hit on her" a bit more encyclopedically. Done
Lil Wayne's "Milli"" → Remove the double quotation mark. Done
is dominantly an electro-pop → "dominantly" doesn't work here. Done
the late 1980s, the song → Shouldn't this need a full stop of a semi-colon, not a comma? Done
Lyrically speaking → Remove "speaking" Done
Lyrically, the song speaks of a young love gone bad. → Source? And can you try not to use "Lyrically," so often. Done
Music reviewer Bill Lamb → Bill Lamb of About.com Done
electropop is linked twice in this section. Done

Critical reception

Resolved comments

Although he was negative in that aspect, Thomas wrote this about Kesha, → This reads a bit fan-like. Done
She is who she is and she offers no apologies." → I assume this isn't supposed to be it's own sentence and is apart of the previous? Done
Leah Greenblatt of Entertainment Weekly commented on Kesha's writing of the album noting that her "herky-jerky rhymes still sound like they came from the bathroom wall of a reform-school kindergarten", not citing that as a negative but instead noting, "Cannibal does have a sulfurous end-of-days whiff about it". → Bit of an awkward read. Done
He also noted that when Kesha's vocals were stripped down she could actually sing and called Kesha's ballads, He also noted that when Kesha's vocals were stripped down she could actually sing and called Kesha's ballads, Needs to be a pause somewhere hear I think. Done
able to pull off such → Reads a bit fan-like. Done
Gary Graff from Billboard → Billboard should be italicised. Done
"Kesha sinks her teeth into some fresh flavors on Cannibal, which will certainly enhance her "Animal" attraction." → Shouldn't have quotes within quotes. Check the rest of this section for them. Done
stated as a positive praising Dr. Luke → Need a comma after positive. Done

Commericial performance

Resolved comments

In the United States, Cannibal entered the Billboard 200 on the week of December 2, 2010 at position fifteen. → Source? Done
write "chart" at Billboard Top 200. Done
at position → at number Done
250,000 in sales. → 250,000 what? lol Done that wasn't ambiguous but I added another word
I know, but it's just clarification. Aaron • ^{You Da One}
shipment → shipments Done
debuted sounds a lot better than entered. Done

Singles

Resolved comments

She hopes the song → Kesha stated that she hopes the song Done
Put "chart" after Hot 100. Done
shifting over 280,000 digital copies. → I always think shifting sounds like something struggles, which is clearly not the case here. Change. Done
The song became the seventeenth song in the history of the chart to accomplish that feat. The song also reached number one in Australia, the United Kingdom and number two in Canada, while charting within the top ten in numerous other countries. → Both sentences start with "The song", change one of them to avoid repetition. Done
mixed to generally positive. → I don't see how a song can be described as "mixed to generally positive," mixed is mixed and positive is positive. Mixed and generally positive is basically saying mixed. ✗ Not done. This is not ambiguous. The song received positive reviews and mixed reviews. To state the song was "mixed" or "positive" when there are both reviews present is against WP:BIASED; inclusion of both is to remain neutral. I have added another word, however.
Hmm, okay. Aaron • ^{You Da One}

Promotion

Resolved comments

Following the performance Kesha appeared live on November 21, 2010, at the 2010 American Music Awards where she once again performed the single. → Following the performance, Kesha performed the song at the American Music Awards on November 21, 2010, in the United States. And source? Done
The performance first opened with previous single, → Kesha opened the performance with "Take it Off" Done
was opened → Remove "was". "Opened" is already in the past tense so "was" is unnecessary. Done
Put sources at the end of sentences please. ✗ Not done WP:SOURCE "but it is usually sufficient to add the citation to the end of the sentence or paragraph" I cite mine when at the end of the use of that source - sometimes one sentence, sometimes 3.
Okay. I generally think that when there is no source at the end of a sentence, it's WP:OR. But that's just my opinion. Aaron • ^{You Da One}
I don't understand why there is a one line paragraph? Just put it on the end of the paragraph. ✗ Not done Because they are separate things. One is about live promotion, while one is about a tour.
Hmm, okay. Still promotion though. Aaron • ^{You Da One}

Promotional songs

Resolved comments

I think this should be a subsection of the Singles section. ✗ Not done None are "promo-singles" and are thus irrelevant to the "singles" section; we have no third party sources calling them promos and iTunes links are not enough.
Why is this a "Promotional songs" section then? It should just be "Other charted songs". Aaron • ^{You Da One}
Why is Billboard Hot 100 linked again? "chart" should be after 100. You should write "chart" after every chart you write about. Done Because it's a different section. Things are allowed to be linked more than once in a larger article, just no in the same sections.
You know you are only mean't to link once in the lead and once in the body, right? Aaron • ^{You Da One}
So "Blow" was a single and a promotional single? Song, then single.
It's a bit pointless talking about the same thing in two sections. It's repetition. Aaron • ^{You Da One}

Track listing

Resolved comments

Tracklist as per the Cannibal audio CD. → Tracklist adapted from the liner notes of Cannibal. Done

Personnel

Resolved comments

No issues.

Charts and certification

Resolved comments

All tables should conform with WP:ACCESS. See here for example. Done

Release hsitory

Resolved comments

All tables should conform with WP:ACCESS. See here for example. Done

References

Resolved comments

FN2: Missing publisher Done
FN3: Missing publisher Done
The publisher for Billboard is Prometheus Global Media Done
There is over-linking of Billboard Done
FN12: Overlinking of MTV and Viacom Done
FN16: Underlinking of Wenner Media Done
FN19: There is a double full stop (..) and over-linking of Entertainment Weekly and Time, Inc. Done
FN22: Missing publisher and overlinking of Rolling Stone Done
FN24: Missing publisher Done
FN31: Should be linked. Inc should not be included. Done But, Inc should be included, Apple doesn't publish it, Apple Inc does - that's their company name.
FN32: Overlinking of Rolling Stone and Wenner Media Done
FN33: Unlinking of About.com {{done-t}
FN36: Overlinking of About.com. So switched 33 and 36 around for linking. Done
FN38: Overlinking of About.com Done
FN39: Underlinking of Hachette Filipacchi UK. Done
FN41: Why are you using this for her discography? ✗ Not done Had the wrong url, it's to show its charting overseas.
FN47: Inc. should not be there. Again, Inc is registered as Apple Inc. ✗ Not done They are the owners/publishers.
FN48: Overlink of Billboard Done
FN51: Inc. should not be there. ✗ Not done see above
FN53: Overlink of Billboard and Prometheus Global Media Done
FN57: Missing publisher Done
FN59: Overlinking of Amazon.com Done
FN60: iTunes, not Itunes. Inc. should not be included. ✗ Not done Again, above :P
FN62: Overlinking of Amazon.com Done
Only Time, Inc. is supposed to include the Inc. But I leave it. Aaron • ^{You Da One}

Summary

I have finished now. References need work as well as prose conerns. On hold for 7 days.

Couple of replies. Aaron • ^{You Da One}

All of my concerns have been addressed. Passing. :). Aaron • ^{You Da One} 11:55, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]