Talk:All of the Girls You Loved Before/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Pamzeis (talk · contribs) 05:11, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I'll be reviewing this article. This is my first time reviewing a music article, so alert me if I screw anything up. Pamzeis (talk) 05:11, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

• the song for what they deemed affectionate lyrics and — seems kinda clunky. Maybe replace "what they deemed" with "perceived" or similar?
• but cancelled the → but canceled the (American English)
• "Safe & Sound (Taylor's Version)", "If This Was a Movie (Taylor's Version)" → "Safe & Sound (Taylor's Version)", and "If This Was a Movie (Taylor's Version)"
• his birthname Adam King Feeney as writer → his birthname, Adam King Feeney, as writer
• and, although Swift did not confirm the inspiration behind, media publications interpreted it as a message to her then-boyfriend — it seems pretty clunky... can it be reworded or split?
• all the women in his life and promises — add a comma before "and"
• memorable, catchy melody → a memorable, catchy melody
• gold" an the lyrics — typo?
• "breezy" and The Times' Will Hodgkinson — comma before "and"
• familiar and wrote that it — comma before "and"
• artist with an "uninterrupted" 18-year run — are the quote marks necessary? They feel like scare quotes to me
• What makes Our Culture Mag a reliable source?

Great article overall with very minor issues. Article  on hold now. Ping me in your replies. Pamzeis (talk) 06:27, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the review, Pamzeis. I have addressed all of your comments accordingly :) Let me know if it needs further work. Ippantekina (talk) 08:33, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Second look

Everything seems fine now!  Passing the article. Pamzeis (talk) 14:08, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed