Talk:Enjoy Yourself (Pop Smoke song)/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Drmies (talk · contribs) 14:30, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but this is not ready to be nominated. It needs some serious copyediting for verbosity, mechanical and grammatical errors, etc. Most of all it needs pruning. Drmies (talk) 14:30, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
- Drmies can you tell me what exactly is wrong with it? The Ultimate Boss (talk) 18:21, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
- It needs some serious copyediting for verbosity, mechanical and grammatical errors, etc. Drmies (talk) 23:33, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
- Drmies I have asked for another reviewer to take over and see if they agree. The Ultimate Boss (talk) 00:51, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
- Drmies I have updated the article. How does it look? The Ultimate Boss (talk) 22:32, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
- Well it is looking better every time, but I still see things that need work, even without going too deeply or looking at the sources. For instance, "Bianca Gracie of Paper wrote the song references" is awkward (because it seems like "references" is a noun, and the omitted relative pronoun just adds to that); really all those citations need to be tweaked. The next, with "mentioned the song is about a gangster" is also not elegant. I maintain that this stuff about legal names is just unnecessary in the lead; it's undue and distracting. "Tyga shared attached screenshots of tweets" should lose "attached", and the rest of that sentence is not very elegant either; more importantly, there is no connection between that statement and the previous one. What were fans criticizing who for? And what does it mean that someone says "but he asked me to participate"? And lose the comma after 50 Cent in the last sentence of that section.
So, there's a lot of these little things that just need work before this can be a GA. I'm not saying it can't be--but I'll also add that I won't review the whole thing, since that's out of my league. What is in my league is GA writing, so if I were you I'd do the best I can on that and then ask for/find a reviewer who knows modern pop songs and all that. Binksternet is my go-to editor for pop, but I don't know if he's interested in reviewing; he might have some tips, though. Thanks, and good luck, Drmies (talk) 22:57, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
- Kyle Peake, can you help with the review? The Ultimate Boss (talk) 23:26, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
- Well it is looking better every time, but I still see things that need work, even without going too deeply or looking at the sources. For instance, "Bianca Gracie of Paper wrote the song references" is awkward (because it seems like "references" is a noun, and the omitted relative pronoun just adds to that); really all those citations need to be tweaked. The next, with "mentioned the song is about a gangster" is also not elegant. I maintain that this stuff about legal names is just unnecessary in the lead; it's undue and distracting. "Tyga shared attached screenshots of tweets" should lose "attached", and the rest of that sentence is not very elegant either; more importantly, there is no connection between that statement and the previous one. What were fans criticizing who for? And what does it mean that someone says "but he asked me to participate"? And lose the comma after 50 Cent in the last sentence of that section.
- Drmies I have updated the article. How does it look? The Ultimate Boss (talk) 22:32, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
- Drmies I have asked for another reviewer to take over and see if they agree. The Ultimate Boss (talk) 00:51, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
- It needs some serious copyediting for verbosity, mechanical and grammatical errors, etc. Drmies (talk) 23:33, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
- Drmies can you tell me what exactly is wrong with it? The Ultimate Boss (talk) 18:21, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
I was pinged, so here I am. The writing is clumsy in this article, not "clear and concise" per Wikipedia:Good article criteria. I see that Burna Boy and the so-called remix (really the original version) are not mentioned in the lead section, which needs to happen. The song was explicitly called Latin trap by the Independent, but Rolling Stone was not so explicit in naming the genre as R&B – they said it was "R&B-inflected" which means R&B was an influence or element of the song. I think R&B must be removed from the infobox and from statements of the song's genre. Rolling Stone can be cited saying the song was one of several on the album with R&B influences. Binksternet (talk) 23:32, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
- Drmies can you please just fail the review? I don't want a reviewer like Binksternet who finds the writing "clumsy". I will work on improving the article later this week. The Ultimate Boss (talk) 08:24, 15 March 2021 (UTC)