Talk:Put the Needle on It/GA1

GA Reassessment

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.

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

Checking against GA criteria

In the infobox, it cites 'house' as a genre but the article does not. Also, the certification entry is depreciated.
- Deleted 'house', deleted deprecated certification entry.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 22:43, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The most obvious error is the chronology of the lead in comparison to the article. Critical reception should come before the commercial performance, etc.
- Adjust ordering within article and placed both under a Reception subHeading.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 22:43, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dance-pop should not be in the opening sentence of the article.
- Moved 'dance-pop' to 2nd ¶.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 23:18, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
and topped the club charts in the United Kingdom, selling in excess of 60,000 copies → The link to this is dead, making the information unverifiable.
- Found an archived link. However the content does not seem to support the charting for 'Put the Needle on It' or the selling. I'll keep looking for a reliable source for this otherwise it will be deleted from Lead and main text.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 23:18, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Kept the topping the club charts claim per Highbeam ref, deleted claim of selling in excess of 60,000 as its not sustained by a reliable source.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 09:02, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In February 2003, it was certified gold by the Australian Recording Industry Association. → What about the chart performance of the song?
- Chart performance described in Lead as "top twenty", in main text as "peaked at number eleven".shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 23:18, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Got rid of February, the ARIA ref for certification is at end of year.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 09:02, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
'Penned' is not formal. Use wrote instead.
- OK.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 23:18, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Minogue was determined to compose a dance music song to thank the British DJs who had accepted her into the dance genre following the success of her single "Who Do You Love Now?" the previous year. → This is a mouthful to read.
- Split into two: same ref covers both.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 23:18, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
MusicOMH.com called the track → Surely a reviewer from the website commented on the track.
- Good point. Kirke now named in main text.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 23:18, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The music video section is completely unsourced, with the exception of one link which is dead.
- Found an archived link. Will look for further sources.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 23:18, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Provided refs for the descriptive text about the music video.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 09:02, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
An entire section for the cover is unnecessary. Further, the source is not formatted correctly.
- Moved the content to make a 3rd ¶ in Background and writing section. Worked on formatting of ref.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 23:18, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
becoming Minogue's fifth song to do so → To do what?
- Fixed.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 06:19, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Inconsistency with 'seven' and '4'.
- Used 'four'.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 06:19, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It also reached number 4 on the Irish Dance Charts → Missing a full-stop, and reference is not formatted properly.
- I've got this better.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 06:19, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Remove These are the formats and track listings of major single releases of "Put the Needle on It", it's not needed.
- OK.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 23:18, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The track listings and formats section is completely unsourced, minus the reference for 'official remixes' which is a dead link.
- Added new refs for formats; remixes available at an archived link.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 06:19, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In the chart table, "Chart (2002)" should be aligned in the centre.
- OK.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 06:19, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Use the singlechart template.
- I have a problem with this particular template: it provides incomplete ref descriptions. I've reformatted the table to provide a similar looking output and used the expanded refs from elsewhere in the article instead of duplicating them or using incomplete ones.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 06:19, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What is the "Upfront Club Chart"? This is the first that I've ever heard of it.
- The chart exists, see "Dannii Tops UK Club Chart" by Andrew Tijs on Undercover.fm News, 10 January 2007. However this ref is for "He's the Greatest Dancer" and does not specifically mention "Put the Needle on It".
- Highbeam describes the Chart itself here and Minogue's "Put the Needle on It" is confirmed as a former No. 1, here.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 23:57, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I've used the 2nd Highbeam ref.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 09:02, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ref. #2 needs publisher
- Supplied.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 06:19, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Refs. #4 and #6 are inaccessible
- Both of these are still problematic. I'm looking for alternative refs.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 06:19, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Found an alternative for (former) #4 from PopDirt, and for #6 used the "Put the Needle on It (Behind the Scenes)" ref.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 09:02, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ref. #9's pubisher is musicOMH
- OK.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 06:19, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What is "eMedia Jungen"? The publisher is Hung Medien.
- eMedia Jungen is the Swiss German web designer of Hung Medien which is published by Steffen Hung (sometimes with other(s) e.g. Dutch Top 40).shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 06:19, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Overall

This article has many problems, particularly with the prose and references. Seven days to fix the issues is plenty of time. Till 03:54, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I think I've got the problems you've indicated plus a few others. Hopefully, its now back to GA.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 09:02, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - I personally think the article needs a bit more work on it, but it would be unfair to delist it as you went through trouble to fix it. Keeping as GA. Till 12:47, 25 October 2012 (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.