Talk:Hard (song)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Hi, Candyo32! I'm beginning my GA review for this article. Reviewer: Torchiest (talk | contribs) 18:00, 4 April 2010 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria[reply]

This article is pretty good, but it has a number of issues that need attention before it becomes a good article.

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:
You had some problems with grammar and punctuation. I went ahead and fixed them.

B. MoS compliance:
When you use quotation marks inside of other quotes, you have to alternate single and double quotes. See WP:MOSQUOTE for details. I fixed this as well.
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:
You shouldn't use references in the lead, since it should be a broad overview of the contents. Save the references for when you get to the detailed explanations in the sections.

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
Reference #8 is a bare link to an online forum. That's not a WP:RS. Can you find another source for showing how many top ten hits she's had, and comparing that to Beyoncé? EDIT: Fixed, but I noticed that #34 is a bare link, and what it points to has no information about Rihanna charting. It must've changed since you first found it EDIT: Just removed it for now. The article is still fine without it.

C. No original research:
Few minor problems here and there. most of which I corrected. You shouldn't put the word "yelling" in quotes in the video description, unless it's actually a quote. If she's yelling, and it's described that way in the source, just say yelling, otherwise use whatever word is in the source. If you're just describing the video, just pull the quotes altogether. EDIT: This still needs to be corrected, and I couldn't find anything in the sources saying she was a lieutenant in particular. Did you read that somewhere? If not, you should change it.EDIT: Fixed.
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:
Is there any way you can expand the background section? It seems a little thin to me. Maybe a quote from Jeezy about how he got involved, or from The Dream or Tricky? In the critical reception section, you should add more reviews. Since this song was pretty popular, two isn't really enough. I've found this: [the metacritic listing], which you can use to expand your reviews. The reviews are for the album, but I'm sure some mention the track "Hard". Just dig around and try to get a few more comments on it. EDIT: Fixed, but I pulled the NYT review, as it didn't have a URL and was really talking about other songs on the album, not "Hard" itself. I don't think you need to worry about fixing it, since you have so many reviews now.

B. Focused:
In the lead, the sentence about Jeezy needs to be re-written. I'd just mention that he's in the song, then give the details in the article itself, since the part about his name change isn't really important in relation to the song. Also, give a quick mention somehow that it had a number of notable live performances, and that it was remixed.EDIT: Fixed first part, still need to add a sentence or two to cover the live and remix sections.EDIT: Fixed.
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
The core of this article is solid, but it mainly needs some polishing up before it's ready to be listed as a good article. The main issues are minor lead clean-up, expanding the two sections I mentioned, and getting a better source for the top ten hits count. Still, I think this can make it to good article. Good luck!

Torchiest (talk | contribs) 19:44, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT: This is coming along nicely! You've fixed most of the major problems, and just have a few minor touch-ups to get it to GA status. Torchiest (talk | contribs) 03:27, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT: This is good to go! Congrats. Torchiest (talk | contribs) 11:50, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]