Jump to content

Talk:True Love Waits (song)/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: MarioSoulTruthFan (talk · contribs) 21:24, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I'm MarioSoulTruthFan and I'll be reviewing your article. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 21:24, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

[edit]
  • I need references for those genres, which should also be included in the main article.
OK, I'm stumped on this one. The genres were added by another editor, and I'm not sure how to source them. Multiple sources mention the IMBW version of the song as being performed on acoustic guitar; does this then qualify it as "acoustic"? One source mentions the song featuring "ambient pulses" but I'm not sure this puts the song in the ambient genre. Having reviewed the sources again, though, I'm not sure where else to look. Popcornduff (talk) 08:36, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Look it up on album reviews, for instance. Yes, but only acoustic on the IMBW album, not the last album, still needs a source for that. Hmm, if it's pulses it's most likely to be nuances, parts, more like to be an influence rather than a genre.
Agreed, I don't think "ambient pulses" cuts it. I can find lots of sources for the album but not the song specifically. Not sure what to do. Popcornduff (talk) 12:44, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Multiple sources describe both versions of the song as a ballad. Would that work as a genre? Popcornduff (talk) 08:25, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It depends, only if it is suitable for this as a Sentimental ballad. Can it fit in this category? MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 16:31, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt it. Popcornduff (talk) 03:23, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Just leave the one from the live album, include the ambient influence from the studio album in the lead and composition section. If you find some other review statng that is a "power ballad" or something like that, just add in the infobox, lead and composition section. "ping me" when you are done with this. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 14:06, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Kinda. I deleted both genres, since having a genre for one version but not the other kinda looks like an oversight and it seemed cleaner to have none at all. If you think that's a dealbreaker I'll restore it. Ping! Popcornduff (talk) 07:32, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
True, in spite that otherwise there would be no genre, but I see where you are coming from. I will pass it now, if you find just add it with the reference. A pleasure to work with you. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 12:46, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Who produced the song for "I Might Be Wrong"?
It had no producer, it's a live performance. Popcornduff (talk) 13:23, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

[edit]
  • Unlink unreleased songs, since the song is not there anymore and no reference to it is made in per say article.
 Not done But the song WAS unreleased for like 20 years. It was, for that period, Radiohead's most famous unreleased song, even if it isn't now. This is also explained at length in the article. Popcornduff (talk) 03:30, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • but struggled to find an arrangement that satisfied them, and it became one of their most famous unreleased songs → but struggled to find an arrangement that satisfied them, becoming one of their most famous unreleased songs.
 Not done As the subject of the sentence is "the band", not the song, your change would literally mean the band became the famous unreleased song, not True Love Waits. Popcornduff (talk) 03:30, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • A live recording was released on the live album → live recording...live album? What kind of version were you expecting in a live album?
 Done Popcornduff (talk) 13:25, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • became one of their most famous unreleased songs → Is no longer an unreleased song, therefore: "became one of their most famous unreleased songs. However, in 2016, a studio version "True Love Waits" was finally released as the closing track on Radiohead's ninth album, A Moon Shaped Pool, rearranged as a minimal piano ballad".
 Not done As per the previous point about "unreleased song", and breaks chronology with I Might Be Wrong's release. Popcornduff (talk) 13:52, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "It received positive reviews". → more detailed information, elaborate.
 Done Have expanded a bit, not sure if it's right though. Popcornduff (talk) 13:52, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should mention charts.
 Done Popcornduff (talk) 07:51, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • ... and well as some info of the Composition and lyrics section.
I feel this is already here: "a ballad with lyrics about love and abandonment"; acoustic guitar version, minimal piano version. Nonetheless I've expanded slightly where I could. Popcornduff (talk) 13:53, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Merged
  • placed → entered
 Done

Background

[edit]
  • I don't know how the picture helps to have a better understanding of the article; explain it to me.

 Not done WP:IG: "The purpose of an image is to increase readers' understanding of the article's subject matter, usually by directly depicting people, things, activities, and concepts described in the article." The photo is of Thom Yorke, the writer and singer of the song, performing the song at a festival. Popcornduff (talk) 03:30, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You should change the description to "Yorke performing "True Love Waits" solo on acoustic guitar at the 2009 Latitude Festival".
Actually, what I said wasn't quite right, apologies. We don't know for sure what song he was performing at the moment the photo was taken, only that he performed the song during that performance. Is it really necessary? Popcornduff (talk) 13:27, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No, but I thought with what you said it was him perfomig the song. Nevermind, it's fine. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 16:46, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I made a mistake, didn't think it through, apologies. Popcornduff (talk) 03:36, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "[It's] been kicking around for about four years" → was this during the "Kid A" and "Amnesiac" sessions or some other album? It's quite confusing the timeline appears out of nowhere.
 Done Popcornduff (talk) 13:30, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In 2016, more than 21 years after its debut, "True Love Waits" was finally released as the last track on Radiohead's ninth album, A Moon Shaped Pool, rearranged as a minimal piano ballad." → merge with the paragraph above.
 Done Popcornduff (talk) 13:30, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Yorke performing at the 2009 Latitude Festival, where he performed "True Love Waits" solo on acoustic guitar" → use other word instead of "performing"; full stop in the sentence, and place the picture on the top of the section. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 13:44, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Removed "performing". No full stop as it's not a sentence, as per WP:CAPFRAG. Popcornduff (talk) 08:02, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Done

Composition and lyrics

[edit]
  • The studio version of the song, released on A Moon Shaped Pool, is a minimal ballad that replaces the guitar with polyrhythmic overdubbed pianos and "ambient pulses" → you have 4 different sources, who said what?
 Done Popcornduff (talk) 07:51, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "I’ll drown my beliefs / To have your babies / I’ll dress like your niece / And wash your swollen feet" — addresses "the difference between young and old, when people start to dress sensible and act their age. This person is offering not to do that to keep the other." The lines "And true love lives / On lollipops and crisps" were inspired by a story Yorke read about a child who was left alone by his parents for days and survived by eating junk food. → use your own words and quotes in between.
I don't know what this means. Can you clarify? Popcornduff (talk) 13:33, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, the quote is quote it's quite long, please use your own words along with parts of the quote. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 16:40, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Have dramatically expanded and rewritten this section. Popcornduff (talk) 03:57, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reception

[edit]
  • Reception → Critical reception
 Done Popcornduff (talk) 05:14, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • 1st paragraph end quote and then full stop, not the other way around.
 Not done as per MOS:LQ. (Am I misinterpreting this? It's possible - feel free to set me straight.) Popcornduff (talk) 13:40, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You are right, my bad. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 16:44, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Arizona Republic review should be together. Not one sentence here and other there, I know what you tried to do but it doesn't work out very well.
 Done Popcornduff (talk) 08:02, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • GQ, however, wrote that the studio → On the hand, GQ wrote that the studio...

 Not done "On the other hand", to my mind, is idiomatic and unencyclopaedic writing. What is the advantage of using it over the simple "However"?

Forget it I missed the however, late night reads.
  • "our sense that an older, wiser man is singing 'True Love Waits'. Perhaps he’s lost a little of his fight, or he knows now that the youthful plea that typically accompanies an earnest acoustic guitar line is not how one wins a battle of the heart with this much history. This doesn’t suggest that the song’s narrator means it any less; I almost believe him more now that he seems resigned to haunting the afterlife, eternally longing for the one who didn’t care to weather the storm together" → use your own words in between the quotes.
 Done Popcornduff (talk) 05:14, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Apply the previous statement for the other two reviews in the third paragraph.

Charts

[edit]
  • Why don't use the Wikipedia regular linking to the french charts? The peak of the song is there.
Do you mean we should wikilink to SNEP? Because... it already does. Popcornduff (talk) 05:41, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No, I meant to use "singlechart" like you have on the Billboard entry below. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 13:40, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I've spent ages screwing around with this and I've kinda done it, but I can't figure out how to do the referencing. It currently links to a broken URL and I don't know how to fix it. Any suggestions? The technical side of Wikipedia has always been beyond me (the chart was added by other editors, not me). Popcornduff (talk) 03:43, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I did it for you, check it out it was my last edit on the article, please try to learn it will come in hand when you need to do more stuff like this. You had some date of 2017, that's impossible. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 14:04, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • You need to create a "Commercial performance" section, despite only peaking in two charts.
 Not done This would simply duplicate the information given in the chart table. There's nothing else to write. Popcornduff (talk) 05:38, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Personnel

[edit]
  • Should be Credits and Credits and personnel
Seems to me that "credits" and "personnel" mean the same thing, so I've just gone with "Credits".
Not really, if I credit someone for something I say he did something, personnel I say who did this, I see your point of view, but all the song articles I have seen say "Credits and personnel". MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 13:40, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but I have no idea what you're trying to tell me here. Meanwhile, GA/FA articles like OK Computer, Billie Jean, Abbey Road just say "Personnel". (I assume there are articles that don't say this but those were the three I checked first, without knowing in advance what they said.) Popcornduff (talk) 13:34, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Accepted  Done
  • ALso needs reference for "I Might Be Wrong: Live Recordings"
 Done Annoying, I thought I added that!
  • A Moon Shaped Pool (2016) → you can link here you don't need to put in front of every one involved in the recording.
Not sure what this means. Can you clarify?
  • Use the inlay notes of the album to support Radiohead memebers.
 Not done Radiohead albums do not typically credit band members for individual roles and songs. There's no way of knowing who did what on each individual song, so I've credited the entire band. Popcornduff (talk) 15:52, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

[edit]
  • Fine

Notes

[edit]
  • Notes → Footnotes
 Done Popcornduff (talk) 08:21, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Gigwise and chart attack are quite unreliable → Replace them.
Not sure Gigwise is unreliable, but I found a different source anyway, so cool. WP:ALBUM/SOURCE lists Chart Attack as a reliable source. Popcornduff (talk) 08:09, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • pitchfork.com or Pitchfork Media → which one is? One is a publisher the other a work, you must use the work always. Publisher is not mandatory if you use the latter as well even better. Correct this.
 Done Popcornduff (talk) 08:21, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Link "azcentral" to "The Arizona Republic".
 Done Popcornduff (talk) 08:21, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Be aware of the dates! Sometimes you use "2016-06-11", others "19 March 2012". I would go for the latter, but it's up to you.
 Done Popcornduff (talk) 08:21, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]
  • Fine

Overall GA review

[edit]
  • You need a "Credits and personnel" section.
 Done
  • Create a "Live performances" section, I mean the song has been played almost since it was created and even requested. I can see a really nice paragraph, two or three with juice information.
What sort of information are you imagining? Live performances are already covered under the "Background" section. Are you suggesting splitting sections? Popcornduff (talk) 13:35, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Huh? Scary! Why not? Popcornduff (talk) 03:30, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
...OK, hi. I really appreciate you taking your time to check out the article. As someone who's done GA reviews, and has had several articles reviewed for GA before, I know it's not a simple task. So thank you! I mean that.
But, as you can probably tell from my responses to some of your suggestions, it looks like we disagree on a few things. Rather than just argue with you on those points, and likely piss you off, it might be better if I just withdraw the GA nomination. I would be happier to have the article fail than implement changes that, in my view, make the article worse. Of course there are always differences in opinion on these things, and some give-and-take is normal, but I think this one might be unsalvageable. What do you think?
I should also add that you make a lot of suggestions I do agree with, and I will certainly be using them to improve the article either way. Popcornduff (talk) 03:30, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't finished with the review. I haven't read the background section yet. It's ok to disagree, these are "suggestions" not mandatory stuff, there is room for improvement. If you want I can fail the article, however I don't feel like doing that because it's quite close to GA status. Think about it twice, I will be willing to fail it, thought. Send me a reply MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 16:13, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Keep going with the review, and when you're ready for me to change the article, I'll start work, and we'll see where we get. Popcornduff (talk) 03:44, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Popcornduff: That's the spirit! You can now start. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 16:14, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I've responded to all your points as best as I can right now, hope I didn't miss anything. Popcornduff (talk) 08:36, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Popcornduff: I've left you three amendments: one is on the lead, the other one on the history section and other on the charts, personnel minor stuff. Te one on the infobox it will take some of your time. I believe that's it, I'll give it a second read and it will be, most likely, a pass. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 13:46, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I think it's only the issue of the genres left now. Popcornduff (talk) 12:52, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I meant to say issues with the background section, you changed it to history which is in fact a better title for the section, but are two things left in there. Take a look again at the personnel section here. I'm still trying to figure out what to do regarding the genres. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 13:46, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:True_Love_Waits_(song)/GA1&oldid=740000157"