Jump to content

Talk:Get Back (Demi Lovato song)/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: ipodnano05 * leave@message 21:09, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Let me just start out by saying this is one of my favorite song of hers, my favorite is "Here We Go Again". But that doesn't I'm gonna be easy on the article ;) -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 21:16, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh really? :D I think my favorite is Skyscraper :P I also really, really like "Got Dynamite" from her second album :) Pancake (talk) 22:53, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]


  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): (MoS):
    Mostly well done.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): (citations to reliable sources): (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): (focused):
    Missing information for "Background" and "Music video and live performances" sections.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
    Pretty neutral
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
    No problems.
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    Could use a still from the music video.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Lead

[edit]
  • "The initial writing of the song consisted of Lovato wanting to write a song about getting back together with an old boyfriend, as opposed to writing mean and heartbroken songs." Rephrase. It's confusing.
Rephrased it a bit. Pancake (talk) 16:50, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's better now :) -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 19:07, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "'Get Back' was released as the album's lead single on August 12, 2008 via Hollywood Records." --> "'Get Back' was released as the album's lead single on August 12, 2008 by Hollywood Records."
 Done
  • "minor commercial success" --> What is that supposed to mean?
That it wasn't a big success? :P Suggestion for re-write? Pancake (talk) 16:50, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe performed average commercially?
 Done
  • There are too many sentences based on chart performance; they give away the entire section of the article. Remove weeks spent on chart.
 Done

Background

[edit]
  • The section is too short. Please look for more background information.
This is all I could find. Not much info exists on this song. Pancake (talk) 16:50, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I know it's hard to find information on these sort of songs. Don't give up just yet. Have you tried Google Archives or HighBeam?
I have. Couldn't find a thing. Pancake (talk) 22:48, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Don't give up. It's somewhere in the Internet. This will be the last point we close.
  • It lacks organization. After the mentioning of the writers, describe the writing process. And then list production details, backing vocals, drums, etc.
 Done
  • What did she mean by "there's enough mean songs" and "heartbroken songs"? In Don't Forget or in general?
She meant in general. Pancake (talk) 16:50, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Then please make sure to get that across
Done, I think. Pancake (talk) 22:48, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The new phrasing is really awkward, "as she believed there had already been made enough mean and heartbroken songs". Maybe "as she believed there had already enough mean and heartbroken songs had been made".
Rephrased. Pancake (talk) 12:06, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, why did it receive a Radio Disney edit? Try and find information on that.
"Kiss me like you mean it" is changed to "Hold me like you mean it", but I don't think a reliable source covers that. Pancake (talk) 22:55, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I know. I find that so stupid! lol Anyways, try. You won't lose anything :p
I know but I have searched through Google News and Highbeam. Demi ain't no Cyrus or Swift, especially not back in 2008. Pancake (talk)
Yeah, I know finding information on her is more difficult. You can use the lyrics of Radio Disney version as a source (from a reliable website like MTV).
MTV's lyrics are just links to Lyricsmode.com. Pancake (talk) 13:10, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
O.K. then don't add it.

Composition

[edit]
  • Move the sentence "Ed Masley of The Arizona Republic compared the song's sound to works by Tommy Tutone and Greg Kihn" before the sentence that speaks about lyrics. Again, it's just to organize it a bit more.
 Done

Reception

[edit]
  • Maybe there should be subsections for "Critical reception" and "Commercial reception"?
The section is so short it is fairly easy to navigate it without subsections. Pancake (talk) 16:50, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
O.K. That makes sense.

Music video

[edit]
  • You can use the behind-the-scenes video that was on the deluxe edition DVD as a source for more information.
I watched it when I originally wrote the article, but I don't think they really mentioned anything that would be interesting for the article. I'll watch it again. Pancake (talk) 16:50, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I watched it myself long ago, and recall her saying it was filmed in one day. Is there anything else?
Added that it was filmed in one day. Barely anything else was mentioned. Pancake (talk) 21:43, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I just watched it again. What a horrible behind-the-scenes video. It doesn't give any insight whatsoever.
  • The video synopsis needs help. We'll get back to this once you enter information about video conception. That might alter the structure of the section:
    • There is no description of how the video begins. Just what it consists of, which is fine because it is a simple video, but then you jump to details of daytime and nighttime performances.
    • You describe her clothing and all of a sudden you jump to the end of the first chorus. There needs to be a transitioning sentence.
    • You might want to describe the video's conclusion (as an the very last thing you see).
I believe it's done. Pancake (talk) 12:07, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Job well done.

Live performances

[edit]
  • Describe her tour performances. There are plenty, and there are the most important. Also, she performed for her live album Demi Lovato: Live: Walmart Soundcheck. There is a lot missing for this section.
Added stuff about Walmart and iTunes Live in London. Pancake (talk) 16:50, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tour performances are still missing. -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 19:16, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'll get right on it! :) Pancake (talk) 21:43, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done
Describe them more. See GAs like Irresistible (Jessica Simpson song) or Causing a Commotion. I know her performances are simple, but you can add critics opinions, such as in Party in the U.S.A.. You can still expand on this.
I have found reviews for her concerts, but no one really tells us their critical opinion on the song. Pancake (talk) 23:24, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Any description of the performance, labeling it as one of the nights biggest moments, fan reactions, clothes, how she acted, etc. -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 05:46, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Track listings

[edit]
  • If you want to make the parenthesis small, that would be fine. If not, it'll still be fine :)
So, do you plan to make it smaller?
Naah :p Pancake (talk) 21:43, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, O.K.

Charts

[edit]
  • How come the ARIA Hitseekers chart isn't listed?
Since US Top Heatseekers is not usually listed, I figured ARIA Hitseekers wouldn't either. Pancake (talk) 16:50, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Falling Down (Selena Gomez & the Scene song) lists it, but I wouldn't trust this if I were you. Let me look into this.
There seems to no guideline for it, so I'd say it is safe to add it to the chart list, especially since it never charted on the main chart.
 Done

References

[edit]
  • Reference 18 is not reliable. Find a new one.
I figured you'd say that. Replaced with Demi's Myspace blog, which is the only other source I can find. Pancake (talk) 16:50, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That violates Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published or questionable sources as sources on themselves. Try and find another. Maybe one of those Disney Channel medianet press releases has information on it.
Great that you suggested medianet! I found a press release there. Pancake (talk) 21:43, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You see. There's always sources.

Other

[edit]
  • It would be great to add a music video still for the music video section, and move the current image to another section.
Maybe this one? It shows her tiny red gloves. Pancake (talk) 16:50, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, that seems to fail Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria. Maybe one that clearly shows her performing with the Manhattan Bridge as a background.
An image with the bridge would probably also fail, as there are free images of it. Pancake (talk) 23:25, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Very well, add a free image of the bridge. -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 05:56, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. Now that there's an image, I also separated the text again, as on Falling Down (Selena Gomez & the Scene song). Pancake (talk) 13:06, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • There should be an "External links" section with a link to the official YouTube video.
 Done

THR comments

[edit]
  • I just took care of some copy and MOS issues on my own, but I also left some tags. Reply here if you have questions or disagree with them.
  • I agree with the 80s music vague tag. What type of 80s music? There are many. What does the source say? Thank you THR. That's something I did not catch.
  • However, I completely disagree with the music video tag. Sources are not needed for a music video synopsis. It's like citing the plot to a book or film (it is never done). Furthermore, it is not over detailed. Overly detailed would be to describe every single thing she did (moving her head, jumping, etc.) -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 17:58, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not looking for a source to describe the video (although if analysis exists, that certainly should be included and might justify the inclusion of more detailed descriptions). I just kept thinking, "So what?" as I read the paragraph. Here's a synopsis that conveys all the reader needs to know about the video: "In the video, Lovato and her band perform the song on a small rooftop stage near the Manhattan Bridge. The performance begins during the day and transitions to evening and night with each verse." The other details are superfluous – they contribute nothing to our understanding of the concept. ("Oh, she was wearing red gloves?? Why didn't you say so? This changes everything!") Two Hearted River (paddle / fish) 18:23, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Lol, maybe what you wrote and her clothes. I definitely think that's important. -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 23:19, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why? Two Hearted River (paddle / fish) 23:28, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Because the way she presents herself in the video is very important, especially with pop female singers. -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 00:10, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
So what insight does "Lovato sports black clothing, a beaded scarf and red gloves" provide? Two Hearted River (paddle / fish) 01:17, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Image is one of the most important thing today with pop acts. And her clothing give insight into that. Lovato is a pop act, and thus it should definitely noted. -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 00:12, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Okaaaaay, I'm starting to believe you, but again, what insight does this information provide? What are the specific inferences/conclusions you draw about her image from the clothing she's wearing in the video? If the detail is worth including and the lay reader is to get something out of it, I would imagine you or Pancake can list a few things (here, not in the article). Two Hearted River (paddle / fish) 02:17, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There's obviously many inferences one can make. For example, she branded herself as a pop rock act, not really too focused on sex appeal, not very feminine, I guess you could say sassy. Unfortunately, critics didn't really lend their attention to this song. So, it can be included to be left to the interpretation of the reader. -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 21:18, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Eh, all right. (By the way, is the nominator still working on this GAN?) Two Hearted River (paddle / fish) 21:42, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know. I'm going to ask him. -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 22:57, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The fair use rationale and caption for the music sample are insufficient. We don't need to hear the sample to gain an understanding of what the caption is telling us. What I've found usually passes muster at FAC (where the rationales get scrutinized by many highly-experienced experienced editors) is to quote a very specific comment from a critic. Thus, listening to the sample helps the listener evaluate the validity of the critic's statement. Check By Your Side (The Black Crowes album) for two examples of how I've done it in my own work.

Two Hearted River (paddle / fish) 20:32, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sample thingy is  Done. About the vague thing, would it be safe to write "1980s rock influences"? The article says that it sounds like early 80s stuff by Tommy Tutone and Greg Kihn. Both of these were rock acts, so.. Pancake (talk) 19:51, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Eh, you can't say it sounds like Greg Kihn based on the source – the source says it sounds like 'the kind of thing Greg Kihn was pining for' (in the lyrics of "The Breakup Song"), and what exactly that constitutes depends on your interpretation of that song. You're better off just quoting reference [6] and say it sounds "like a Tommy Tutone B-side". I'd feel more comfortable about the sample caption/FUR (the latter needs to be updated, by the way) if you had a quote that spoke to something really specific about the song, but I suppose second opinions will fly at peer review or FAC someday. About "1980s rock influences", that doesn't help much because there are still many subgenres of 80s rock that sound quite different, and, again, it's a stretch based on the sources. Two Hearted River (paddle / fish) 20:46, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately I misread the sentence about Greg Kihn. I removed 1980s stuff and only kept Tommy Tutone. As for the quote, critical reception was extremely limited for this song. As you may see, there are only five reviews and no quote really speaks about a specific part of the song. Pancake (talk) 18:02, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Here are two more snippets that might be useful to you:

Demi Lovato Solo Album Debuts at No. 2
314 words
6 October 2008
Entertainment Close-Up
ENTCUP
English
© 2008, M2 Communications, Ltd. All Rights Reserved
"...raucous lead single 'Get Back' is more Benatar than Backstreet."

Listen Up ; Music reviews by USA TODAY critics
Edna Gunderson, Ken Barnes, Elysa Gardner, Steve Jones, Brian Ma
809 words
23 September 2008
USA Today
USAT
FINAL
D.4
English
© 2008 USA Today. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All Rights Reserved.
** 1/2 TRYING TOO HARD
The 16-year-old leading lady of Disney's Camp Rock launches her solo career with a sizable assist from camp-rocking cohorts the Jonas Brothers, who co-wrote and co-produced six tracks. They provide an insidious, Go-Go's-like single in Get Back and a pretty ballad in The World Inside, but La La Land is far too frantic for its own good. As for Lovato, her vocals rock pleasantly but are far too mannered, cooing coyly one minute, shrilly over-emoting the next. She shows promise as a singer and writer, but less showing off would improve matters. -- Ken Barnes

Two Hearted River (paddle / fish) 14:45, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats! This is now a GA. -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 02:10, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Get_Back_(Demi_Lovato_song)/GA1&oldid=1136275587"