Jump to content

Talk:Sexy! No No No.../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: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 22:16, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A few thoughts-

  • "The production and songwriting began with each group member meeting with producer Brian Higgins and discussing what had happened with them since the release of the Chemistry (2005)." Meeting individually? Also, what was there to discuss? What had happened? I'm not really clear about this sentence
    I got a bit confused while paraphrasing this also. The quote from the website says "It starts with a chat with songwriter Brian Higgins. One by one, we go to his house-cum-studio and tell him all about what’s been happening since our last album. We talk relationships, feelings, you name it." - Saulo Talk to Me 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Bandmate Nicola Roberts explained that Higgins take inspiration from those discussions" This makes no sense. I can't fix it, because I'm not sure what you're trying to say.
    He takes inspiration to write new tracks. Shoud I completely re-write this or just added "to write new tracks" after discussions? - Saulo Talk to Me 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The track opens with Cole's distorted vocals singing over a "spooky" instrumentation,[6] "Cause I've been sitting back, no chance of rolling / Hoping that nothing ever blows, no no / Boy, did you ever think that loving would be / Nothing more than walking me home, no no."[17]" This doesn't read well.
    Take a look and see if it reads better now... - Saulo Talk to Me 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ok, you've made this mistake in a few places, and it goes completely against MOS:LQ. You should only put punctuation inside quote marks when it's in the original quote. If it isn't, it should be outside. Please double-check this.
    Checked the sources and  Fixed - Saulo Talk to Me 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The review section is a little quote. quote. quote. but I'm happy to let that slide at GAC. It'd be picked up on heavily at FAC, though.
    Being a GAC or FAC, the article has to be consistent. To you have any sugestions to make this section better? - Saulo Talk to Me 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "It opens with Cole then singing the introduction, as she and the group are seen wearing PVC catsuits while standing in front of a red material." Poorly worded
  • Has the song appeared on any compilation albums? I feel like that belongs in the article. (Now I've said that, is it common practice to leave it out of articles about songs?)
    It has, but as far as I'm concerned, it usually isn't noted on articles. At least many GAs like ...Baby One More Time and Toxic for example do not include the compilations the song has appeared. - Saulo Talk to Me 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Girls Aloud (2007). Tangled Up (Liner Notes) (Compact Disc). Girls Aloud. London, England: Fascination Records." Perhaps format this as "Girls Aloud (2007). Tangled Up (liner notes). Girls Aloud. London, England: Fascination Records."? Either way, try to format it the same way as the booklet you cite?
    Take a look. - Saulo Talk to Me 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure I like that it's described as electronic rock, when this is cited to a student newspaper. Having read a few student newspapers, they're generally terrible. It's described as "electro-punk" and "pop" by more reputed sources- perhas go with that and drop the student newspaper altogether?
    Allmusic is more reliable so I replaced with electropunk and sourced. - Saulo Talk to Me 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Paul Caslin (2009) [2009] (in English) (Colour, PAL). [Out of Control Tour: Live from the O2 Arena] (Liner notes). London, England: Universal Music." Formatting is odd. Some information there that just isn't needed.
    Take a look. - Saulo Talk to Me 00:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a few tweaks. This is actually a really strong article- the effort you've put in is clear. A little tweaking here and there, and the removal of those problem sources, and you've got a very strong good article here. J Milburn (talk) 23:02, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I've made a few tweaks. The writing's still pretty choppy in places, but this is just GAC; I'm not going to demand perfect prose. This may actually have a shot at FAC, but, if you are going to do that, it's probably best to try to get in a copyeditor. A few quick thoughts, other than the general need for a prose smoothing-

As I say, these aren't necessary at this point- while it isn't perfect, I'm happy to promote to GA status. Great work! J Milburn (talk) 19:39, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking your time. - Saulo Talk to Me 01:50, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sexy!_No_No_No.../GA1&oldid=1140124616"