Talk:FourFiveSeconds/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Wikipedian Penguin (talk · contribs) 16:30, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Sources and spotcheck

If you're going to use this source, I urge you to at least attribute to the author. Please refer to User:John/Is the Daily Mail a reliable source? and Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 192#Daily Mail.
What makes this and this reliable sources?
Ref 1: OK verifiability and paraphrasing
Ref 2: OK verifiability and paraphrasing
Ref 6ab: OK verifiability and paraphrasing
Ref 12a: Compare "...a track featuring backup vocals by John Legend, Fergie, and Elton John" (article) with "which actually featured ten other artists, including Fergie, John Legend, and even Elton John" (source). The former gives the impression that there were no other vocalists than Rihanna, West, John Legend, Fergie and Elton John.
Ref 12bc: OK verifiability and paraphrasing
Ref 12d: Period/full stop should go inside the quotation, as it is in the source.
Ref 13: fails verifiability; "FourFiveSeconds" is not explicitly stated to be folk pop, soul pop nor acoustic.
Ref 14a: fails verifiability
Ref 14b: OK verifiability and paraphrasing
Ref 14c: As obvious as it may be, "Although credited as a primary artist on the song..." needs to be referenced with an explicit source. Also, be careful with the phrasing: the source doesn't say Paul plays all the instruments, so remove "the" in "plays the instruments".
Ref 21ab: The lines MetroLyrics gives are slightly different. Also, "These lines are followed by West singing..." is incorrect, as they are immediately followed by the chorus, not West. The Wikipedian Penguin 19:25, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ref 18a: OK verifiabilty and paraphrasing
Ref 18b: OK, but not keen on the use of "achieving legendary status". I'd just quote the original here and try to paraphrase the quote you currently have from Def Pen. Also, how do we know this isn't some other Travis, with a surname that begins with G?
Ref 41: Where are you getting "as a result of the digital downloads"? And "...ending the longest break between top-ten songs in the 56-year history of the chart" is slightly close to the original phrasing. You should probably also add that this was Paul's 23rd top-ten song if you're going to mention Kanye and Rihanna's feats.
Ref 64ac: OK verifiability and paraphrasing
Ref 65b: fails verifiability and does not match the certification table below
Ref 83abc: OK verifiability and paraphrasing
Ref 91: OK verifiability and paraphrasing, although slightly overquoting
Ref 99 is not only of questionable reliability, but it also failed verification since it does not explicitly mention "FourFiveSeconds" or the VEVO awards.
Ref 130: instructions unclear
Ref 131: OK. The Wikipedian Penguin 13:01, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comprehensiveness

Prose and neutrality

Manual of Style

Media

The sound sample caption needs sources. The fair use rationale "purpose of use" also needs to incorporate the information from the caption to justify the usage.
File:Herb Ritts.jpg is non-free and requires either an adequate rationale or replacing/removing. The Wikipedian Penguin 10:56, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Review status

I've begun the review. Please make amendments or replies as we go. You have seven days to respond, although more time is available upon request. The Wikipedian Penguin 19:29, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-initial review comment) I highly recommend archiving all of the iTunes links. While iTunes is a reliable source for release dates, they have a tendency to wipe singles from their stores when the album they're from is released. While R8 doesn't look like it'll drop any time soon, better safe than sorry, as you really don't want 12 dead links all rotting at once. Azealia911 _talk 16:57, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mind taking this on tomorrow (addressing points). — Calvin999 17:04, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. I was thinking about asking you. The Wikipedian Penguin 21:31, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know when you're done. — Calvin999 11:32, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I do my reviews in stages. Once the sources are done, I look at the body for content, grammar, etc. The Wikipedian Penguin 17:01, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There has been limited progress with this and I have made multiple extensions to the "deadline". In addition, points remain unaddressed. As is procedure, this review will be closed as unsuccessful and archived shortly. The Wikipedian Penguin 14:20, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.