Jump to content

Talk:When I Was Your Man/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of the review of a good article nomination. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by John Cline 17:55, 10 May 2014‎.[1]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: John Cline (talk · contribs) 09:33, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Opening statement

[edit]

Over the coming days, I will review this nomination against Wikipedia's good article criteria. Anyone interested is invited to participate and welcome to provide their constructive input. Please indent comments under specific bullets when your comment relates to it, or initiate a comment in the appropriate section so it too can be considered.

Cursory review

[edit]

I have completed a cursory review of the nomination and am optimistic that the article will achieve the endeavored GA assessment. There were no issues present that would trigger a quick-fail of the nomination, nor is it in full compliance with the GA criteria. I will begin adding specific comments below; including suggestions for improving the article. The decision to incorporate my suggestions, wholly or in part, rests with the article's contributors. Normally, I do not edit an article while I am conducting a review. Nevertheless, I will edit the page If I am specifically asked; or if content in violation of policy is found; requiring action. Please ask questions if something isn't clear, and don't hesitate to disagree if something doesn't seem right. Through discussion, we will reach the best possible end; our collective goal, I believe.—John Cline (talk) 10:23, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments initiated by reviewer

[edit]
  • This sentence: ("When I Was Your Man" was written by Andrew Wyatt and by Bruno Mars, Philip Lawrence, Ari Levine, while composed by the latter.) needs rewritten. The serial elements of the latter grouping is missing the required coordinating conjunction and the composers will not parse properly using the "latter" designation once the conjunction is added. Consider this form: ("When I Was Your Man" was written by Andrew Wyatt, Bruno Mars, Philip Lawrence and Ari Levine; with Mars, Lawrence and Levine credited for composing the song as well.)—John Cline (talk) 07:17, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • This sentence: ("When I Was Your Man" is a soul and pop piano ballad, the lyrics describe a pre-fame heartbreak as he regrets a girl that he let get away, expressing his earnest hope that her new man is giving her all the love and attention he was unwilling, or unable to provide when they were together.) is un-necessarily long. A full stop should be used after "piano ballad" instead of a comma. Joining the two independent clauses adds nothing of value; detracting from readability instead.—John Cline (talk) 07:17, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • This sentence: ("When I Was Your Man" received positive reviews from music critics, who praised Mars's vocals and named it a "vulnerable and emotional ballad".) has multiple issues and needs rewritten.—John Cline (talk) 07:17, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • It implies that all critics gave only positive reviews, and is directly contradicted in the "critical" section, which says: "The song has received generally positive reviews from most music critics." and also the included example of Slant Magazine's Andrew Chan, who called the piece: an embarrassment.[2]—John Cline (talk) 07:17, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Mars's vocals" establishes the style election for the possessive form for Mars as ('s), making: "Mars' slowest-peaking", "becoming Mars' fifth number 1", and "becoming Mars' 10th top 10", inconsistent with that style election, whereas "complimented Mar's simplicity" is a typographical error, and the context of "Mars' reached the same mark as Diddy" is otherwise incorrect for using the possessive form.—John Cline (talk) 07:17, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • 'named it a "vulnerable and emotional ballad".' again reads as if all critics concur, and collectively agree on this single characterization.—John Cline (talk) 07:17, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • This link: "South Korea Gaon International Chart (Week: December 9, 2012 to December 15, 2012)". Gaon Chart. December 15, 2012. Retrieved December 21, 2012. is dead. If possible, please update the link to restore its functionality.—John Cline (talk) 07:35, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The opening sentence in the "Composition and lyrics": ("When I Was Your Man" was written by Bruno Mars, Philip Lawrence, Ari Levine and Andrew Wyatt, while production was handled by the latter three production-team The Smeezingtons.) incorrectly identifies Philip Lawrence, Ari Levine and Andrew Wyatt as the The Smeezingtons production-team.—John Cline (talk) 01:15, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Rolling Stone cover story featuring Mars tells us who the subject of "When I Was Your Man" is; further stating that the couple remained together – in contrast to the song's lyrics. I think this is significant, and that it should be included in this encyclopedic telling.[3]—John Cline (talk) 18:13, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Should I state the girlfriend name or that it's not relevant? It might be relevant for the futere in case he writes new songs regarding her as a subject? Should I put that in writting and producing or composition and yrics?MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 09:02, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I would think "composition and lyrics" is better situated for this content. Because it is a "reluctant revelation" by Mars, it follows to include its mention later opposed to sooner. Because Jessica Caban has an article herself, mentioning her by name is not prohibited in any manner and in fact the interlink helps build the web of content we are endeavoring for.—John Cline (talk) 18:13, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Please that a look at the setences. Thank You for the information. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 18:24, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You have done a fine job adding the content and reference.—John Cline (talk) 18:53, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. The information is covered at MOS:SERIAL and it allows serial elements, (more than two), to use, or omit the comma before the coordinating conjunction, stipulating consistency throughout the article. In all cases where a serial comma could be used, this article establishes a preference to omit its use. The example I showed uses a serial comma and should instead omit it. To remain consistent with all other occurrences, simply remove the comma after Sam Smith.—John Cline (talk) 18:48, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the note. I fixed. It's good to know for future references. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 18:57, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The following sentence is confusing: (The song reached a high point of number 4 on March 8, 2013 and on March 22, 2013.) First it requires a comma after the first appearance of 2013, and the full stop after the second seems to disconnect from its double-platinum certification. If so it should be a comma instead onto a lowercase "i" as in: "The song reached a high point of number 4 on March 8, 2013, and on March 22, 2013, it was certified double-platinum by the IFPI Denmark, indicating sales of 60,000 copies.—John Cline (talk) 18:13, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • In each instance where "donning a pair of sunglasses" is mentioned, "donning" is the incorrect verb tense for it is the present participle of don and implies he is putting them on instead of the past participle, donned, meaning they already were on. In each case where it says "donning a pair of sunglasses" it should instead say: "donned in a pair of sunglasses"—John Cline (talk) 19:21, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I'll be frugal with any changes made; expounding a supporting rationale in the edit summary. Anything reverted will in no way affect the assessment of this article, which is nearly complete.—John Cline (talk) 22:58, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've decided against copy-editing the article. It is best, I think, for me to continue in the manner which I've used in the past; having seen it work. Instead I offer this final round of comment/suggestions which I suppose reflects what I may have otherwise copy-edited.

  • (... expressing his earnest hope that her new man is giving her all the love and attention.) is an incomplete sentence. Add a closing clause like: (... expressing his earnest hope that her new man is giving her all the love and attention that he failed to provide).—John Cline (talk) 07:26, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • (The song was nominated for Best Pop Solo Performance at the 56th Annual Grammy Awards. It won "Favorite Hit" at the 2013 Premios Juventud.) seems like it would read better chronologically, as: (The song won "Favorite Hit" at the 2013 Premios Juventud and was nominated for Best Pop Solo Performance at the 56th Annual Grammy Awards.—John Cline (talk) 07:26, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Worldwide, it was the eighth best selling digital single of 2013 with sales of 8.3 million copies, being among some of the best-selling singles worldwide) begins and ends with the same word. Consider: (It was the worlds eighth best selling digital single of 2013 with sales of 8.3 million copies, joining an elite group of the best-selling singles worldwide.) to remove the redundancy.—John Cline (talk) 07:26, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • (The song has been covered by many artists, including Rascal Flatts, Sam Smith and Mike Ward ...) Remove the unsupportable WP:WEASEL word, many to instead say (The song has been covered by artists, including Rascal Flatts, Sam Smith and Mike Ward ...).—John Cline (talk) 07:26, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • (... Rascal Flatts, Sam Smith and Mike Ward, who released an studio version of the song ...) should be "a studio version". An studio version is just plain wrong; grammatically.—John Cline (talk) 07:26, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • (... the song is written in the key of A minor, with Mars's vocals range from the low note ...) The first possessive form for Mars occurs in the lead as: (... received mostly positive reviews from music critics, who praised Mars' vocals ...). Change this to (... the song is written in the key of A minor, with Mars' vocals range from the low note ...).—John Cline (talk) 07:26, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • (It starts with rolling piano riff and near-scat vocal cadence, ...) has these issues. first, "rolling piano riff" is missing the article and should be "a rolling piano riff" ...). Also, in music, riff is a well known, but specialized term; it should be interlinked. And, scat vocals is also musical jargon that should be interlinked, but; we don't generally link only half of a hyphenated expression – Therefore, I'd spell out the term. And, when the sentence picks up after the quoted verses. "he starts lamenting his current single state is an anachronism because he can't start something that has already started; it should be: "as he laments" – making the entire sentence read as: (It starts with a rolling piano riff; unto a nearly scat vocal cadence: "Same bed but it feels just a little bit bigger now / Our song on the radio but it don’t sound the same,"—as he laments his current single state.—John Cline (talk) 07:26, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • (On March 8, 2013 Warner Music Group send the song to Mainstream radio in Italy.) needs a comma after the year, send is the wrong verb tense, should be sent, and here-again, "mainstream" need to be lowercase.—John Cline (talk) 07:26, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • (It was the fourth most played song on radio and the eight most played on Top 40 and the eight most played on Adult Contemporary radios, according to Nielsen SoundScan.) needs only one coordinating conjunction and the ordinal number for eight is eighth; as in: It was the fourth most played song on radio, the eighth most played on Top 40 and the eighth most played on Adult Contemporary radios, according to Nielsen SoundScan.—John Cline (talk) 07:26, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • (In Australia, the song has been a success, debuting at number 44 ...) should not say "the song has been a success"; this is non-neutral in Wikipedia's "encyclopedic voice". We present the facts and allow the reader to decide if it means success. Just say: "In Australia, the song debuted at number 44 ..."—John Cline (talk) 07:26, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • (In South Korea, the song was a success, peaking at number 9 ...) here-again, drop stating a conclusion, to instead simply say: "In South Korea, the song peaked at number 9 ..."—John Cline (talk) 07:26, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • (The performance had Mars with a Los Angeles Kings hat with piano and organ accompaniment.) reads better as: "The performance had Mars wearing a Los Angeles Kings hat; with piano and organ accompaniment.—John Cline (talk) 07:26, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No need to be sorry; these things happen. In fact I just noticed the song title in this sentence says "When I Was Tour Man" so clearly "Tour" needs changed to Your as well.—John Cline (talk) 11:13, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • (The video portrays the taping of a TV special, in which Mars is playing a lonely balladeer on the ivories while sitting in front of a piano donning a pair of sunglasses with a half-full glass of whiskey, atop his instrument, wearing a suit and shades cover his eyes, while he keeps reminding himself of what he could have done to keep his lover, the video is based on 70's vibe and retro effects.) is too long. End the first sentence after "keep his lover" and make "The video is based on 70's vibe and retro effects." a separate, sentence. Also, here-again; "donning" is the wrong verb tense. Perhaps here, use: "The video portrays the taping of a TV special, in which Mars is playing a lonely balladeer on the ivories while sitting in front of a piano with sunglasses donned and a half-full glass of whiskey atop his instrument; where it says "wearing a suit and shades cover his eyes", "shades cover his eyes" is superfluous to "with sunglasses donned", so perhaps instead say "wearing a suit with a carnation Boutonnière, while he keeps reminding himself of what he could have done to keep his lover."—John Cline (talk) 07:26, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • For the image caption: (Bruno Mars singing in front of a piano donning a pair of sunglasses with a half-full glass of whiskey, in the music video.), again donning is the wrong tense; instead say: "Bruno Mars singing in front of a piano donned in a pair of sunglasses with a half-full glass of whiskey, in the music video."—John Cline (talk) 07:26, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Chris Payne, from Billboard called the music video "somber") either needs a full stop, or a transition to the next sentence, for example (Chris Payne, from Billboard called the music video "somber", while "Nicole Sia of Spin" ...).—John Cline (talk) 07:26, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Nicole Sia of Spin praised "the song's visual takes".) should only be (Nicole Sia of Spin praised "the song's visual.) The source says: "the song's visual takes an equally spare but stylized approach." meaning its the song's visual which takes the stylized approach and nothing at all about the song's "visual takes".—John Cline (talk) 07:26, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments initiated by article contributors

[edit]
I added a collapsible template and will move each bulleted thread into the template as I verify its purpose fulfilled.—John Cline (talk) 20:13, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome, and thank you for your diligence here, and also for your efforts improving the article. There are more things I need to comment on, and checks I still need to make. We're not done just yet, but definitely moving along.—John Cline (talk) 19:41, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm aware of that, we have only checked the lead and some information on the release, reception and dead links. Once you raise more issues and fixes needed to be made I will come here to improve them. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 12:46, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments initiated by interested observers

[edit]

Preliminary findings

[edit]

Based on my review, I find this article meets the criteria for assessment to "GA" class. All suggestions have been thoughtfully considered and where appropriate, amicably amended. I wish to extend admirable mention to MarioSoulTruthFan for the obvious preparations and diligent copy-editing that preceded this review. It is noteworthy that through an effective presentation, this otherwise benign topic is considerably interesting to read. I have been made a believer and feel that if I don't soon conclude this review, I am quite likely to purchase the entire album. The story of this song could not be told better if even by a publicist – yet, it is encyclopedic from the start. You are an asset to Wikipedia MarioSoulTruthFan, and I want you to know that I have thoroughly enjoyed working with you, to review this "good article". I will leave this review open for a short time, while I formulate a final disposition. This is to allow comments from others regarding aspects I may have missed, or considerations I have not entertained. Absent mitigation to the contrary, I intend to close this review as successful upon my return. Bravo—John Cline (talk) 12:30, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, John Cline I'm thrilled by your kind and generous words. You should also take a lot of credit since you provide sources, corrected setences and give detailed explanations regarding some aspects of this review. I have to say that I'm extremely happy to see that you are intrested in purchasing the album (you will not regret, at least give it a listen and then decided). I believe that was one of my goals and the goal of all GA article creators, reviewers and intrested parties by catching peoples attention towards a song, single, album or performer in order to make them at the very listen streaming the song. I sincerely hope that we can work again in other articles. Thank you, one more time, for everything. Yours truly - MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 16:13, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What I have found

[edit]

When I Was Your Man is a good article because—

  1. It is Well-written to wit:
    2. (a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
    (b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.[1]
  2. It is Verifiable with no original research. It has been reviewed, and found compliant to the following standards:
    3. (a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
    (b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);[2] and
    (c) it contains no original research.
  3. The article is Broad in its coverage and has shown that:
    4. (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;[3] and
    (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  4. It is Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  5. The article is Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute and it does:
    6. [4]
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio, and the specific examples within the article have shown:
    7. [5]
    (a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
    (b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.[6]
    Well done!—John Cline (talk) 17:50, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Footnotes

    1. ^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
    2. ^ Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.
    3. ^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
    4. ^ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of constructive editing should be placed on hold.
    5. ^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
    6. ^ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.
    The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:When_I_Was_Your_Man/GA1&oldid=607956631"