Talk:Chiisana Koi no Uta/GA1

GA Review

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

Nominator: Miminity (talk · contribs) 11:37, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: IanTEB (talk · contribs) 13:25, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Though I think this is an interesting topic, I have some concerns on whether it passes GA criteria. There are sentences which either have grammar issues or violate Manual of Style, multiple times in almost every section (the Guild of Copy Editors might be able to help), and certain key elements of what I would expect to see from a music article is missing. I will provide more specific comments below the checklist.

Checklist

It is reasonably well written.
a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):

b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a. (reference section):

b. (citations to reliable sources):

c. (OR):

d. (copyvio and plagiarism):
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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):

b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):

Comments

I will divide my comments into sections for the different criteria.

1. It is reasonably written.

There are several sentences that do not adhere to the Manual of Style or could use improvements in terms of grammar/flow. As I mentioned above, I think it might be best to submit the article to the Guild of Copyeditors. I think this might be the biggest hurdle holding the article back.

The first instance of the song's name in the Background and release section doesn't have quotation mark even though subsequent mentions do
A cover of the song used as the insert song on [...] and the fifth ending theme of the 2024 anime Alya Sometimes Hides Her Feelings in Russian performed by Sumire Uesaka - this sentence from the lead needs to be reworked. It should open with something like "Other cover versions include", or something along the lines.
There are several parts of the article where apostrophes should be incorporated to help with readability. Sentences like "In an interview with Rina Sako from Natalie in 2019, Uezo said that he did not know the song's key when he wrote the song commenting that 'Chiisana Koi no Uta' starts with a lower key but with a higher chorus" are very long, which makes them hard to read. Also watch out for repetative wording, like with "song" in the aforementioned sentence ("he did not know the song's key when he wrote the song").
while writing the song's lyrics as Okinawans have a tendency not to use personal language when speaking - because it has not been introduced that the band is from Okinawa, this sentence isn't really understandable. Unless it refers to the song's island setting? In which case it should clarify by saying "residents of Okinawa - an island prefecture in Japan - tend to not use personal language". Regardless, the explanation of the lyrics are after this sentence, so some rearrangement would be needed.
The chronology in the infobox should be used for artists only, not specific albums.
In the background section, why is boku in quotation marks, but kimi and anata are not?
There are also some more minor MoS issues, like in "During a special event in the Gunma Prefecture held on June 2, 2024, the song was played simultaneously by 1.000 musicians" where the thousand should use a comma instead of dot.
A few sentences are very short and choppy, like in Commercial performance. While not the biggest issue, it could greatly benefit the article's flow if these sentences are more tied together.

2. Verifiable with no original research.

Sources generally look good, but I am concerned about the use of Uta-ten. Whenever I've looked into using it for one of my own articles, I've always found it to be very blog-like. Though the sources are overall decent, I found some issues with the referencing of the article.

[42], [43], and [48] I presume are citations for a book, but the references only mentions author, year, and page, which does not satisfy verfiability requirements.
Quation marks should be removed from source titles per WP:QWQ
[10] should use Template:Cite certification instead of Cite web. The current source does not tell me where I can locate the relevant information.
Some names for websites are incorrect. Rockin’ On! Japan in [22] should be Rockin'On Japan, and 音楽ナタリー in [36] should be the English name, Natalie.mu or Natalie Music

3. Broad in its coverage.

To me, this article does not tell me everything I'd like to know about the song. Maybe the sources aren't available, but I would particularly expect more explanation of the composition (punk is listed as a genre in the infobox, but not mentioned in the lead).

The Commercial performance section mentions only a single live performance, whereas Livefans (not a reliable source itself, but can be helpful in finding other sources) has 19 pages of information. A full Live performances section could probably be created.
As a side note, everything in Media usage is cited to press releases and should be removed. And why is the Film adaption in a seperate section?

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

While generally neutral, there are issues of opinions being presented as fact, like "The song is known for its simple and repeating chord progression which makes 'Chiisana Koi no Uta' easy to learn."

5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Article has been expanded since GA nomination, but I don't see any major problems here.

6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio.

Not a single so no cover available. I am a little confused about the picture of Minami Hamabe, however; the Cover versions section opens by saying that the most comercially successful cover was by Yui Aragaki. She has a high-quality picture as well so why not use that?

Conclusion

Failed - There are a few too many issues in the article's current state to pass, but I do believe the topic has potential to become a very good GA. If it is submitted to the Guild of Copy Editors or similar processes like peer review, please feel free to reach out on my talk page and I will try to help out the best I can. I noticed this is the submitter's first GA, so don't feel discouraged. Most of the very talented Wikipedia writers I know of failed their first GA. There is no counter for fails; it's obvious care was put into this article, so keep at it with improvements and I believe it can definitely pass in the future. IanTEB (talk) 13:25, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]