Talk:GBI (German Bold Italic)/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Cukie Gherkin (talk · contribs) 07:05, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Images
- No fair use images, neat
References
- References seem to be formatted and organized really nicely; unless I'm overlooking something, does not seem to use any low-quality sources. Will do a spotcheck after reviewing the article itself.
Lead
- Changed 'has little success' to 'had little success'
- Otherwise, lead seems solid (will come 'round back if it seems like a vital aspect of the article is absent from the summary)
Infobox
- All details important for the infobox appear to be present, and vice versa with the article
Background and production
- All good
Composition
- Seems fine, though if I may ask, which source is being used to say that she "seductively reads her line"?
- I changed "seductively reads her line" -> "seductively talks" (per Independent: "... features Minogue talking and giggling over a minimalist house rhythm") Damian Vo (talk) 07:54, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
Release and remixes
- All good
Reception
- Is there anything that you feel may be gained by expanding the reception provided by Priya Elan?
- Sadly the author only mentioned it as one of Kylie's most interesting yet lesser-known collabs Damian Vo (talk) 07:54, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- I tweaked 'has' to 'had' again, as the arguments made for its lack of commercial success are all past tense
Production and synopsis
- All good, although I think that the following line about it not being released fits better here than in the following section.
Reception and analysis
- All good
Aftermath
- I feel it may be a little redundant to say "has made several..." and "has worn traditional..." maybe change it to "where she wore"
- Fixed
Comments
- Will finish tomorrow, too dang tired. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 07:45, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- Done reviewing the text, will do a spotcheck soon. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 16:50, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Reviewed the following:
I'm comfortable that these sources indicate the article is accurately citing external sites. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 01:48, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for picking this up for a review. I almost forgot I nominated this article back in June. I fixed all of the issues you mentioned above. Please let me know if you have any more questions Damian Vo (talk) 07:54, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- No problem. Good job on the article and the (very few) changes! - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 00:48, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for picking this up for a review. I almost forgot I nominated this article back in June. I fixed all of the issues you mentioned above. Please let me know if you have any more questions Damian Vo (talk) 07:54, 3 February 2024 (UTC)