Jump to content

Talk:Rx (Medicate)/GA1

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

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.

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Aoba47 (talk · contribs) 18:39, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeeeeeaaaahhhh, buddy! Thank you! Look forward to working with you! — Miss Sarita 18:46, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Lead and infobox
  • There appears to be a single cover out there for this so I would add it to the infobox with appropriate ALT text.
    • I have never actually added a photo to WP, so if you could allow me a little time to do some research so that I can complete this task correctly, I would be extremely grateful. I believe that there is also a cover for the "symphonic acoustic" version of the song. Should this cover also be included? — Miss Sarita 06:14, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • Take as much time as you need. Just use one cover though. There is no reason to include two covers. Aoba47 (talk) 06:16, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        • So, I uploaded the cover and did my best to describe it with ALT text. It seems the cover depicts a scrambled photo since there are random letters seen (specifically, the letters M, W, F, and S). I'm not sure if you feel this is important to try to explain and if so, I can try to dig into it to make more sense of it (if anything, to satisfy my own curiosity). — Miss Sarita 00:10, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Add the year in which Wake Up Call was released.
  • You need to separate the single release part from the first sentence into its own sentence. See this article (”S&M” (song) to see what I mean by this.
  • I do not believe that the reference in the infobox is necessary. This information should be located and cited in the “Background and composition” section of the body of the article.
  • Remove this part (It performed well commercially,) and just include information on the chart placement and certification. The current wording is far too subjective. Just let the information speak for itself.
  • Comment: After looking the lead over, I feel like I need to expand it. I wrote it before I worked on the rest of the article and, because I'm a big ol' dummy, I failed to include any additional information after the expansion was complete. Thoughts? — Miss Sarita 06:14, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • The lead is rather short so expansion would be helpful. I would suggest that you look to other FAs on songs as examples for a good lead. I would also make the music video stuff into its own sentence rather than awkwardly clumping it into the second sentence. Aoba47 (talk) 06:17, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • Lead has been expanded. Thank you for dividing the "Background and composition" into separate sections. It looks great, and I was also thinking it was a good idea to break it down. — Miss Sarita 23:16, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Background and composition
  • For this sentence (Lyrically, the song is the group’s commentary on the opioid epidemic that has affected North America.), specify what you mean by “the group” and link them as this is the first instance you mention them in the body of the article.
  • I would revise the second sentence of the first paragraph to make it run more smoothly from the preceding sentence. Right now, it feels rather abrupt to jump from the opioid epidemic to the lead singer’s divorce and subsequent therapy.
  • Link Billboard on its first use.
  • I am confused by this sentence (Connolly revealed that the chorus had been written first, expressing that he was "bored and sitting around”.). I do not see the connection between the first and second parts of this sentence.
  • I am also confused by this part (He told Billboard, "I probably could have talked about anything and made the song silly and stupid". The lyrics shifted into something more serious after a friend's wife took a cocktail of pills and never woke up.). Is the second sentence part of the quote? If not, then the tone is not correct and it is rather vague and confusing. It needs to be revised to read more encyclopedic.
  • Link pop music in “the pop genre”.
  • This sentence (He rejected the notion that he was abandoning rock or was trying to cater to musical trends, and further asserted that the musical direction of the track occurred naturally, which was something that he, the rest of the band, and the record label all supported.) is rather long. I would make this part (which was something that he, the rest of the band, and the record label all supported) into its own sentence.
  • I am confused by the Team Rock link. It goes to Metal Hammer?
    • I have no idea what happened here. I think I saw "TeamRock" at the top of the article and WP redirected me to the Metal Hammer article. TeamRock owns (or at least used to own) Metal Hammer, but I have just now noticed that the article was written by Classic Rock magazine (another magazine that TeamRock owns...or used to own). I have changed the link. Thanks for catching it! — Miss Sarita 09:52, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do you have any references that cite the actual lyrics of the song?
    • Yes! I actually found some within one of the sources already listed on the article. I will try to weave them into the prose to handle some of the points you made above. — Miss Sarita 09:52, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I believe this part of the review is complete. I took the "Background and composition" section and completely rewrote it. I hope that it is satisfactory and that I didn't just make it worse. Haha! But of course, any suggestions or critiques you have are obviously welcome! Next step is to expand the lead which I will complete today. Thank you! — Miss Sarita 19:48, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Release
  • Do you have any more information on the "symphonic acoustic” version? If not, then I would combine the two paragraphs together as the one-sentence paragraph is rather silly and just disrupts the flow of the article overall.
Critical reception
  • Are there any critical reviews on this song? It is odd that this is missing.
    • I was only able to find one review of the song within an album review. It was harshly critical and since it was the only reliable review I could find, I refrained from including it in the article to avoid violating WP:NPOV. Considering how popular the song is within its respective genre, I was suprised I couldn't find more, but the articles written about the song seem to be solely focused on how the song came about (since it possessed different attributes from the band's usual sound) and the subject matter (the opioid epidemic). Any suggestions you have would be greatly appreciated! — Miss Sarita 09:52, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • If the negative review was from a reliable, third-party source, then I would include it in the article in the commercial performance and recognition section. I would also rename that section back to commercial performance and recognition. Aoba47 (talk) 16:42, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        • I attempted to blend parts of the album reviews in which the song is specifically mentioned and critiqued. Please review and let me know if it should be revised. Also, I included some of the lyrics for clarity (they are also specified in the review), but one word is the "F-bomb", so I'm not sure if it should be omitted or censored. — Miss Sarita 01:03, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
          • Wikipedia is not censored so I would include it. I will look through this section tomorrow if that is okay with you. I would suggest expanding the lead to make sure that it covers all of the information in the body of the article. Aoba47 (talk) 01:35, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
            • Oh, no problem! Please, take your time. I appreciate all of your quick responses and suggestions. Sorry this is taking so long. Real life decided to get busy at the most inopportune time. I'm going to finish all the suggestions pertaining to the "Background and composition" section and then expand the lead when everything else is completed. Hopefully, this round of the review will be finished by tomorrow night. Thank you so much for your patience. — Miss Sarita 03:04, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Commercial performance and recognition
  • This section needs to be before the one on the music video.
  • You only mention one chart appearance in this section. You will need to put everything from the “Charts” section into the prose here.
  • Again remove this part (performed well commercially) due to the same reasons that I have cited in a previous section.
Partnership with Shatterproof
Personnel
References
External links
  • I would include this section with a link to the music video and to the metrolyrics page here.
Final comments
  • Once this set of comments are addressed, I will look through the article again and provide more suggestions here if necessary. Aoba47 (talk) 03:14, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Whew! This round of the review is complete! — Miss Sarita 23:16, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Question: The article mentions the lead singer's whistle in the song a couple times and the acoustic guitar riff as well. What about adding an audio file of the first 30 seconds (or less) of the song, which would accompany the whistling, the guitar riff, and the beginning lyrics of the song? Is that something to consider? It doesn't look entirely difficult and I could possibly have it done tonight. (Sorry if I seem to be adding more work to your plate. The article is ten times better with all of your suggestions and I've been inspired to keep adding to it.) — Miss Sarita 00:11, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Verdict
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rx_(Medicate)/GA1&oldid=831329546"