Talk:Like I'm Gonna Lose You/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 16:31, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be happy to review this. JAGUAR 16:31, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've given the article the once-over and everything seems to be in order from a copyright point of view. Content and structure are similar to other articles of this type, and the prose is in good shape. — Diannaa (talk) 22:05, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Other comments

I have to disagree with Diannaa, who posted her comments while I was writing this up: to my eye, the article could use a good copyedit to help it attain the "clear and concise" level of prose required for GAs. I also found one place with clearly close paraphrasing. Some specific examples, and places where it doesn't quite reflect the sources:

Writing and development section:

"Trainor wanted to it exclude from her major-label debut". Aside from the problematic prose, that isn't what the source says. She wasn't going to include it—I'm sure there were a whole bunch of songs she'd written that she didn't consider including—but nothing there mentions deliberate exclusion.
second paragraph, "By the request": "At the request" would be better. Also, recast the sentence that has "(Gelbuda's home studio)" so the words aren't in parenthesis (or get rid of them entirely).
third paragraph, opening sentence: this is a bit of a mess, and needs phrases and people moved around so it becomes a smooth statement of what happened.

Composition section:

first sentence: delete the comma or make some other change to turn this into a valid sentence
second sentence: does she span her soprano range (use the whole thing?)—the USA Today source doesn't say that, and it doesn't sound like something liner notes would say.
third sentence: this should be recast, since "comprises" only covers the instrumentation and harmonies; "uses" would be better. I'm not sure why the Elysa Gardner review is being used to source this sentence, since it says nothing about instrumentation or harmonies on this song, just about the two main vocalists.
fourth sentence: "was noted to have" is not a well-written phrase
paragraph 2, final sentence: this is not a complete sentence, and should be recast

Critical reception section:

the second sentence doesn't work as a sentence, particularly in the connection between the first half and the quoted second half
the final sentence of the first paragraph is a sentence fragment; this needs fixing
the phrase "played to the smarm of Legend" is a clear case of close paraphrasing approaching copyvio; even the word "smarm", a clear pejorative, should be in quotes, since it's the exact word used by the reviewer. Also, since said reviewer writes the quote "Trainor can turn earnest" before the "smarm" comment, using "adding" here is misleading. (Generally, present-tense words ending in "ing" should be avoided when referring to reviews and reviewers; stick to the past tense.)

Chart performance:

there's inconsistent use of written-out numbers versus digits, and also hyphenation. Examples include "number 63" and "number 11", versus "number ten" and "number ninety-five". Also "charted at 45", which omits "number" entirely. For hyphenation, compare "number-one hit" vs. "top ten hit"
"It stayed at number one for a second, third, and fourth week." Better: "It stayed at number one for a total of four weeks."

That's all I have time to do for now. I trust that the formal review will find other examples and issues in the areas I haven't checked. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:45, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both, that's quite comprehensive in itself. I'll start my review later in the day. It would be good if somebody could tackle these comments as I would hate to close this if MaranoFan remains blocked. JAGUAR 14:48, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Initial comments

The attribution needed tag in the Writing and development section needs dealing with
"They recorded "Like I'm Gonna Lose You" in 2014 at The Green Room in East Nashville, Nashville" - East Nashville, Tennessee
"and climbed to the top spot" - how about and reached number one?
"For the chart dated July 25, 2015, the track debuted on the Hot 100 at number ninety-five" - needs to be in numerals
"on the issue dated 12 December 2015" - no need for the year in this use
The release history section could probably be merged into the Charts and certifications section, as a subheader
""Like I'm Gonna Lose You" is a retro style, soul ballad" - no need for comma
Ref 29, ref 23 and ref 85 are dead

I think Bluemoonset got everything I would have mentioned, so my comments are fairly short. The prose is generally good and comprehensive for the subject. I found some minor prose issues but I strongly recommend taking in the recommendations Diannaa and Bluemoonset left too. I'll leave this on hold until they're all clarified. It would be good if somebody can get to this in MF's absence. JAGUAR 14:33, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Should MaranoFan come back, I'll be happy to review this again. I'm afraid I'll close this because it's been two weeks with no activity.

JAGUAR 14:49, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]