Talk:Title (album)/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Aoba47 (talk · contribs) 16:23, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Grabbing this for a review if that is okay with you. It is weird to think that this was released four years ago. Time does go by quickly >< lol. Aoba47 (talk) 16:23, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lead and infobox

I am assuming the reference in the first sentence is used to support the “debut major-label” part, but I just wanted to clarify that with you.
For this part (replaced Trainor's 2014 EP with the same name), I would spell out EP as extended play.
I am not sure if the 1950s in music and 1960s is music wikilinks are particularly useful, particularly when there are wikilinks to the genres and styles of music later in the same paragraph. I would remove them.
I am not sure if the second reference in the lead is necessary, as that information should be located and sourced in the body of the article as well.
For the producer parameter of the infobox, I would pt Trainor first in the list as she is the executive producer. I do not think the “also” part is necessary for “also exec.”.

Background

Use Trainor’s full name and wikilink her on the first mention in the body of the article.
For this part (she told USA Today), italicize “USA Today”.
I think you can simplify this part (Trainor laid on her back on a bed Kadish made in the studio) to something like (Trainor laid on a bed Kadish made in the studio).

Writing and inspiration

I am not sure why this image is used in this section. It seems rather random and disconnected with the text about the writing and recording.
Again, I do not believe the 1950s in music and 1960s is music wikilinks are particularly necessary.
I do not think that this sentence (The record's cohesion was influenced by the works of American group the Fugees.) is fully supported by the source. In the source, Trainor said the album would contain a “Fugees kind of feel”. You could say that the album was partially inspired by the Fugees, but there is not a direct correlation between “the record’s cohesion” and the Fugees influence in the article.
This part “all of whom rejected it.” requires a citation.
I would move this part (Trainor composed "All About That Bass" when she was an independent recording artist. She "shopped" the song around at various record labels and offered it to numerous artists, including Beyoncé, all of whom rejected it.) from the end of the first paragraph to the beginning of the second to keep all of the information about “All About That Bass” together. Right now, it flows a little awkwardly to have the information spread between the end of the first paragraph and the beginning of the next.
For this part (Reid suggested the song's demo should remain as the final version but have additional audio mastering.), I would recommend saying “after additional audio mastering” instead of “but have additional audio mastering”.
For this part (Trainor's love for harmonies), I think it should be “of” instead of “for”.

Composition

Again, I am not certain how this image connects with the material in this section. It seems rather random. And I do not see any reason to include multiple images from the same event in the same article.
You mention “blue-eyed soul” in this section, but not in the infobox.
Unlink “soca” as you had it linked in a previous part.
For this part (Carl Wilson of Billboard wrote that "The Best Part" is reminiscent), I think you can use “it” rather than repeat the full title as it would be clear from the context.

Release

I would clarify that EP stands for extended play.

Promotion

I would move one of the two performance images down to this section as they provide more of a close-up.
Wikilink That Bass Tour
Do you think you should mention here that most of the MTrain Tour was canceled due to health issues?

Singles

This part ("All About That Bass"'saccompanying music video) is missing a space.
The songs do not need to be wikilinked again as they were already wikilinked in a previous section.
Since you mention the anti-feminism and cultural appropriation criticism for “All About That Bass”, do you think you should also include the criticism for “Dear Future Husband”?
You mention the music videos for the first two singles, but not the last two. Is there a particular reason for this?

Critical reception

Unlink Rolling Stone, Billboard, New York Daily News, and The Daily Telegraph as they all have been linked in a previous section.
Could you explain to me how you structured this section? There is a lot of good content here, but the organization is confusing. You jump around between topics and good/bad criticism quite a bit. There should be a sense of a more cohesive narrative here. I would recommend looking at this source (Wikipedia:Copyediting reception sections) to see what I mean by this. I will do a more extended review on this section when I get a better understanding on the structure.
I would integrate the two sentences from the “Awards” subsection into the rest of the section. It is a little odd to see such a short subsection, and I do not think the separation is necessary.
Slant Magazine should be in italics.

Commercial performance

Again the image does not seem relevant here at all.
I would revise this part (though they were not released as singles) to something like (despite not being released as singles)

Track listing

Wikilink “I’ll Be Home”. Also, do you think information about this song should be included in the “Songs” subsection.
I would add information about the DVD in the “Release” section as I was not aware of it until reading through the track listing.

Final comments

Overall, you have done a wonderful job with this article. My primary concern is the “Critical reception” section, but otherwise, everything else should be easy to fix. Please let me know when you have addressed my comments, and I will be more than happy to read through it again. Reading through the article made me realize I actually did enjoy the album when it came out; it is sad to see how much hate Trainor has gotten since, but it is what it is. Have a great weekend! Aoba47 (talk) 17:11, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I addressed most of these. None of the album reviews say anything about I'll Be Home and that song doesn't have any other coverage either so I couldn't expand on it. I moved the image of her performing Dear Future Husband to the Songs section instead of deleting altogether, because that section contains information about DFH's composition and the article would be quite boring without at least two images. As for the critical reception section, the first paragraph is a positive review, the middle two are mixed and the last one is negative. I think it looks neat tbh so I'd like to hear more about whats the concern there. Regards.--N Ø 07:48, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I only have one more suggestion. The sentences on the awards should be incorporated into a paragraph (the first paragraph seems appropriate as awards are a form of positive reviews). Once that is done, I will pass this. Also, I was not saying to add critical reviews for "I'll Be Home", but I was recommend just adding a sentence about that a Christmas song was on the Japanese edition as that could be helpful. I will leave that up to you though, and it is not a required part of this review. Aoba47 (talk) 08:24, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Verdict

I will ✓ Pass this now. Aoba47 (talk) 02:25, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]