Talk:The Time of Our Lives (EP)/GA2
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Cavie78 (talk) 22:25, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
(MoS): 
- There were lots of problems with the prose initially. I've given the article a copyedit for uncontroversial grammatical issues but there are still some minor issues that need clearing up.
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): (citations to reliable sources): (OR):
- Sources look good, no original research.
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): (focused):
- There are a few future developments that are hinted at in the 'Background' section that could do with a small amount of further detail. I'd like to see some of the paragraphs reorganised to aid readability.
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Looks good.
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No problems.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Images and audio file have appropriate fair use rationales or are CC/
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
Firstly I'm very sorry for the amount of time this review has taken. I didn't realise I'd be so busy over the past few weeks when I took it on. Anyways... the article looks to be in good shape and I only have a small number of concerns which are detailed below. Best wishes Cavie78 (talk) 18:29, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
General
[edit]- Terms such as 'Winter' and 'Fall' shouldn't be used as they mean different times of the year in different countries. You should change to specific months or "the last quarter of [year]".
- Extremely good point.
Done -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 01:58, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
- There's still a mention of fall in 'Chart performance' Cavie78 (talk) 03:22, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
- Took care of it. Sorry. -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 05:56, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
- There's still a mention of fall in 'Chart performance' Cavie78 (talk) 03:22, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
- Extremely good point.
- A "Deluxe international edition" is mentioned in the tracklisting - do you have any information about this that you could include in the prose?
- Nothing that is not stated in the "Track listing." -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 01:58, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Lead
[edit]- "The EP was released on August 28, 2009 by Hollywood Records, initially as a Wal-Mart exclusive. With alterations in artwork and track listing, an international edition was issued later." You should state that the EP was released in the United States on August 28. Later is a bit vague - was the international edition released on October 16 or was that just the date it was released in the UK? Same goes for the information on release in the 'Background' section.
- Done
- Ok but the main body of the article states "..an international edition was released in numerous countries, beginning with the United Kingdom on October 16, 2009." If the international edition was released on the same date in all countries why do you say "beginning with the United Kingdom"? Cavie78 (talk) 03:23, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
- "Musically, the uptempo tracks on the record diverge in pop rock and dance-pop genres while ballads are mainly kept at soft rock." Where does this information come from? I'm not convinced that this is entirely supported by the cites in the 'Composition and music structure'.
- What do you mean? What part? ... Because, on the "Composition and music structure" section, it describes the uptempo numbers to be in the pop rock and dance-pop fields and the ballads to be soft rock. -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 03:40, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
- Ok that's fine. The sentence does, however, need rewording, I would suggest something along the lines of "Musically, the uptempo tracks on the record are pop rock and dance-pop songs while the ballads are largely soft rock." Cavie78 (talk) 19:37, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
- Done
- Ok that's fine. The sentence does, however, need rewording, I would suggest something along the lines of "Musically, the uptempo tracks on the record are pop rock and dance-pop songs while the ballads are largely soft rock." Cavie78 (talk) 19:37, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
- What do you mean? What part? ... Because, on the "Composition and music structure" section, it describes the uptempo numbers to be in the pop rock and dance-pop fields and the ballads to be soft rock. -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 03:40, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
- "Internationally, the EP also had great success in Greece, Austria, and Spain." You've already said that the EP charted within the top ten in nine countries - why single out Greece, Austria and Spain? You should state positions if you want to include these.
- Those countries were singled out because it had better peaks on those countries. The positions were added. -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 03:40, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
- "Cyrus performed songs from The Time of Our Lives at numerous venues, including one at the 2009 Teen Choice Awards that caused a media uproar, and embarked on her first world tour, the Wonder World Tour, to promote the EP in late 2009." Why do we need to know that the songs were performed at "numerous venues"? It is enough to say that she has performed them live several times. Per WP:LEAD you should not hint at things that appear in the article so you should briefly explain the "media uproar" that surrounded the performance as the Teen Choice Awards. "including one" is grammatically incorrect and needs rewording.
- Is it better now? -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 03:40, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, looks good Cavie78 (talk) 19:37, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
- Is it better now? -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 03:40, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Background
[edit]- You say that Cyrus "originally planned for her succeeding album to be edgier and more predominant in rock music" and that she wanted to "take a break" after promotion for The Time of Our Lives was complete. So what happened? Did she do either of these things?
- Well, it all depends on whose perspective we're speaking of. If we are talking about her own personal view, then, I am not certain. It would be something that I would have to look up. But as far as media coverage goes Can't Be Tamed is viewed as a career step to transition from her Disney roots, since it is of a more provocative image. Although, it is more dance-pop than rock. In fact, it's probably not even pop rock in most aspects. And, as for the hiatus... she is in the midst of it I think. She said that in her break she would indulge in more films. She filmed one movie this year and is filming another as we speak. Anyways, I'm not sure if adding the latter part to the article is necessary. Also, I don't know how to organize it. What do you think? -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 01:54, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
- Perhaps it might be enough to just say "She said that, after completing promotion for the EP, she wanted to "step out and maybe take a break" for some time in order to compose music that inspires her, although her next album, Can't Be Tamed, was released less than a year after The Time of Our Lives, in June 2010." What do you think? Cavie78 (talk) 03:32, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
- Using the word although may lead to WP:Original research. What about just stating that Can't Be Tamed was released less than a year later, but in a new sentence after what it already says. -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 22:40, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
- Good point, your suggestion sounds like a good compromise without going into lots of detail about issues not related to the EP. Cavie78 (talk) 01:45, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
- Done
- Good point, your suggestion sounds like a good compromise without going into lots of detail about issues not related to the EP. Cavie78 (talk) 01:45, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
- Using the word although may lead to WP:Original research. What about just stating that Can't Be Tamed was released less than a year later, but in a new sentence after what it already says. -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 22:40, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
- Perhaps it might be enough to just say "She said that, after completing promotion for the EP, she wanted to "step out and maybe take a break" for some time in order to compose music that inspires her, although her next album, Can't Be Tamed, was released less than a year after The Time of Our Lives, in June 2010." What do you think? Cavie78 (talk) 03:32, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
- Well, it all depends on whose perspective we're speaking of. If we are talking about her own personal view, then, I am not certain. It would be something that I would have to look up. But as far as media coverage goes Can't Be Tamed is viewed as a career step to transition from her Disney roots, since it is of a more provocative image. Although, it is more dance-pop than rock. In fact, it's probably not even pop rock in most aspects. And, as for the hiatus... she is in the midst of it I think. She said that in her break she would indulge in more films. She filmed one movie this year and is filming another as we speak. Anyways, I'm not sure if adding the latter part to the article is necessary. Also, I don't know how to organize it. What do you think? -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 01:54, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
- Why are details of the EP's release in the background section? It seems to me that 'Background' should be merged with 'Development' as they talk about the creation of the EP, and that this information be merged with 'Singles' as the first paragraph and that that section be renamed 'Release' or 'Release and singles'.
- I disagree. "Background" gives an overall scope of the album. It says the purpose of the EP and its release, which correlates with release information. "Development" is a more in-depth walk through how each song on the EP was made. Also, I don't think singles and release should be merged together because they are loosely intertwined. -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 01:54, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
- The problem is that the 'Development' section talks about why the EP was released and what sort of sound Cyrus was going for, then talks about the EP actually being released but the next section, 'Development' goes back to the period of time before the EP was released by discussing the writing of the songs that appear on the record. I found this very confusing as someone who knows nothing about Cyrus (although I think it would be confusing even if the article was about a record I knew more about) Cavie78 (talk) 03:27, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
- I see your point. What about now? -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 22:40, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
- I think that makes more sense. Cavie78 (talk) 01:45, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
- I see your point. What about now? -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 22:40, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
- The problem is that the 'Development' section talks about why the EP was released and what sort of sound Cyrus was going for, then talks about the EP actually being released but the next section, 'Development' goes back to the period of time before the EP was released by discussing the writing of the songs that appear on the record. I found this very confusing as someone who knows nothing about Cyrus (although I think it would be confusing even if the article was about a record I knew more about) Cavie78 (talk) 03:27, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
- I disagree. "Background" gives an overall scope of the album. It says the purpose of the EP and its release, which correlates with release information. "Development" is a more in-depth walk through how each song on the EP was made. Also, I don't think singles and release should be merged together because they are loosely intertwined. -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 01:54, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Development
[edit]- "The was at first denied by the EP's personnel due to not understanding it." This needs rewording, I don't know what you're trying to say.
- Done
- What is cite 18? (American Express rewards)
- A behind the scenes video for the Wonder World Tour was gifted to concert ticket buyers in the US... if they purchased the tickets with an American Express card. This whole operation is called "American Express Rewards." -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 01:41, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Promotion
[edit]- "Cyrus danced atop an ice cream pushcart" Might just be me but this sounds odd, do you mean an ice cream cart?
- Yes... it is basically the same. I just referred to it as it was referred to in the article. It was changed though. -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 01:43, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Remaining concerns
[edit]There seem to be just two issues left with the article Cavie78 (talk) 01:48, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
- As I say above in the 'Lead' section: "The main body of the article states "..an international edition was released in numerous countries, beginning with the United Kingdom on October 16, 2009." If the international edition was released on the same date in all countries why do you say "beginning with the United Kingdom"?
- It wasn't released on the same day in all countries. I can confidently say that release dates are different throughout the globe. The lead doesn't say the phrase "begging with" because of how articles are generally said on articles: Thriller (album) Madonna (album) and others are examples.
- Adding that Can't Be Tamed was released less than a year later in the 'Development' section.
- Done
- Ok, good work am happy to promote. Cavie78 (talk) 03:47, 7 January 2011 (UTC)