Talk:Don't Bother/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 07:26, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments (and apologies for the massive delay, first half reviewed)....

"is a song by" performed by, written by...? Which...?
"It was released..." -> "The song was..." (as the last thing you talked about was the album).
"through which" -> "in which"
"generally mixed to positive reviews" sounds like "mixed" to me.
What's a " component chart."?
"In this region" the last thing you mentioned was a "component chart", how does that relate to "region"?
Link "certified" appropriately.
"in countries such as" -> including.
"Shakira also served as the producer of the song" ->"Shakira also produced the song".
""won’t ever see me(Shakira) cry"" space and probably need square brackets here.
"in international territories" well that means the planet earth, be specific.

The Rambling Man (talk) 17:03, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done all --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 17:33, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

More

"was digitally released to the iTunes Store" do you mean "released for download on the iTunes Store"?
"Pam Avoledo from Blogcritics" is Blogcritics notable? If so, why no article? If not, why do I care about what they have to say?

Blogcritics had been linked earlier once in the BG and Composition section. --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 17:33, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Chart performance section is dry, it keeps "In X, on the X charts, the song..." mix it up a little. And you probably don't need to tell people that the "Austrian Singles Chart" is in Austria....
"Thus, it narrowly missed charting in the top 40 of the chart by two places" yes, that's abundantly obvious, you don't need to state it.
Rock in Rio image caption doesn't need a full stop.
"Don't Bother" - 4:17" etc, use en-dash here, not hyphen. See WP:DASH. Check ref titles too, e.g. ref 2, ref 3.....
Certifications table doesn't need to be sortable.

~~The table is made using the certifications template so the sorting thing can't be modified.~~ I have merged the table into the charts section. --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 17:33, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Online refs should have access dates and publication dates where possible.
Don't use abbreviations in the refs, e.g. NYT -> The New York Times.

Done all --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 17:33, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll put the article on hold for a week. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:34, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I still see plenty of references without access dates, publication dates, WP:DASH violations etc. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:17, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Access dates- I found out that the problem was with the weekly chart templates. Access dates have been added to them. Publication dates- Every source which mentions a publication date has one. Mostly only the charts sources don't have publication dates because Hung Medien only details their chart performance and no particular date is mentioned. Dashes- Oops I read the policy wrong.

Fixed --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 14:31, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]