Talk:Yoda (song)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Carbrera (talk · contribs) 06:22, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Initial comments:

Firstly I'd like to apologize for the extended delay in the review. I am very sorry
No worries.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 14:48, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'd suggest adding the track listing chronology to the infobox
How does that look?--Gen. Quon (Talk) 14:48, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Also a suggestion: place 1985 in parentheses after Dare to Be Stupid in the first sentence of the lead; the rest is of the lead is very well written
Done.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 14:48, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not so sure if "StarWars.com" should link to the article for Star Wars
Good point. They are two different things.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 14:48, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"The Dr. Demento Show" --> Link since this is the first appearance in the article
Done.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 14:48, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"This version of the song does not feature accordion, and is truer, musically, to the original song." --> "This version of the song does not feature the use of an accordion and is truer, musically, to the original song."
Done.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 14:48, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"Although it was left off his first greatest hits album,[7]" --> I'm not so sure if this belongs here; it is quite trivial
Done.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 14:48, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"Disneyland" --> Link please
Done.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 14:48, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Again on Reference #2, I'm not so sure if "StarWars.com" should link to the article for Star Wars
Done.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 14:48, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There is something wrong with Reference #16
That was weird, I think I fixed it!--Gen. Quon (Talk) 14:48, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ON HOLD – A job well done with this article! Take as long as you need to consider my suggestions. Regards, Carbrera (talk) 23:42, 20 March 2017 (UTC).[reply]

I believe I have modified everything that you requested. If I have a bit more time, I'd be happy to integrate the below suggestions as well.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 14:48, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Other comments

It's generally not sign of good, clear and concise prose when parenthetical comments are used; to have two of the in the lead is far from ideal. I suggest recasting the phrasing to avoid them.
I removed two of them, but the one defining Ray Davies as the "Lola" songwriter seems awkward to remove.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 16:14, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You don't necessarily have to remove the information, though I think you were right to do so here. Another choice is always to recast the sentence so parenthesis are not necessary; sometimes dashes can be used. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:36, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The wording desired to put the song on one of his albums is very odd: "desired to" is not a normal phrasing. I would suggest "wanted to" or "wished to" or "hoped to". This affects both the lead and the "Obtaining permission" section.
Changed to 'wanted'.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 16:07, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It's still "desired to" in the "Obtaining permission" section. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:36, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Early success: even managed to hit, and hold on to—this is not encyclopedic prose, and should be revised.
Changed.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 16:07, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The statement Davies immediately gave Yankovic permission to record the song in "Obtaining permission" is not backed up in the source given, nor is the similar statement in the lead. This is an extraordinary claim, and requires a reliable source to back it up.
I changed 'immediately' to 'eventually'.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 16:10, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Do you know the actual timing? If you're not sure, then "eventually" is also problematic. Two possibilities: use a word without chronological implications, like "ultimately", or drop the qualifier entirely. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:36, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ever since then, Yankovic has directly asked the songwriters for permission whenever possible. This is a little too close to the original in structure, starting with "Ever since" and ending with "whenever possible", and should be rewritten so it isn't such a close paraphrase.
How is "Since this incident, Yankovic has made sure to approach the songwriters themselves so as to avoid incidents such as this."
It also has a few problems. First, you've lost the sense of "whenever possible": Yankovic isn't always going to be able to talk to all of the artists he wants to parody. Second, you've used two variants of "incident" in the same sentence. And third, I'll bet you could write this without the word "since". BlueMoonset (talk) 04:36, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Continuing popularity, first sentence: this sentence contains quotes, and thus must be given an inline source citation by the end of the sentence.
Done.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 16:07, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
When asked why a video was not made, Yankovic also speculated that the legal and monetary requirements to make a decent video for "Yoda" would have made the project impractical. This comes after a couple of sentences of explanation, which have now been retroactively turned into speculation. I'm not sure whether this is saying that even if there had been enough in the budget to make a standard video, it would have cost far more than that, or that it would have been more expensive than the budget even if it had been the only video made. This needs to be clear.
I changed it to: "This, and the fact that the majority of the album's video budget went to the then-current 'Like a Virgin' parody, meant that a 'Yoda' video was out of the question. When explicitly asked why a video was not made, Yankovic cited the aforementioned reasons and also speculated that the legal and monetary requirements to make a decent video for 'Yoda' would have made the project even more impractical."
I think that the "When explicitly asked" sentence is unnecessary—it effectively duplicates the information already given and adds some unhelpful speculation. The "was out of the question" phrase is not very encyclopedic; I suggest "was not feasible" instead. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:36, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There's something wrong with the formatting of the final reference citation; please fix it.
Fixed it.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 16:07, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I hope these are helpful; they do need to be addressed for the article to meet the GA criteria. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:15, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@BlueMoonset: What do you think? Carbrera (talk) 02:25, 22 March 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Carbrera, I've added a few comments above. However, the fact that the lead is currently three paragraphs is a GA criteria issue since it's longer than a lead should be in an article of (well) under 15,000 prose characters: the lead should be no more than two paragraphs. There's also a general prose issue: the word "said" is used only once, yet "remarked" is used three times. That ratio should be reversed: plain "said" should always be used more frequently than words that characterize how something was said. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:36, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@BlueMoonset: How does these changes look?--Gen. Quon (Talk) 15:27, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@BlueMoonset: and @Carbrera: Just a reminder ping. How does the article look now?--Gen. Quon (Talk) 17:13, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Gen. Quon, I've just done a fairly significant copyedit of the article, including some condensing and rewording; I also added Dr. Demento to the lead section since it is important to this song. I don't believe I've introduced any inaccuracies, but please make sure I haven't. At this point, I believe my concerns have been addressed by you and now me, so I'll leave the remainder of the review to Carbrera. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:46, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed a few things on the infobox; I do not feel like the entire album track listing is necessary as it is fully accessible on the album page itself. I also added a hlist to the songwriters. Thank you for your patience, Carbrera (talk) 22:55, 27 March 2017 (UTC).[reply]