Talk:Love Power (Disenchanted 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: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 07:43, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]


  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):
    b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a. (reference section):
    b. (citations to reliable sources):
    c. (OR):
    d. (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a. (major aspects):
    b. (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
    b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/fail:

(Criteria marked are unassessed)

I will start this today! --K. Peake 07:43, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox and lead[edit]

  • Infobox looks good!
  • Add a comma after fantasy film
  • ""Love Power" is a" → "It is a"
  • The strength should not be referred to as "proposed" per the body
  • Swap the recorded and composed sentences for the correct order
  • I feel that the current order is more appropriate, because typically a song is composed before it is recorded; it also matches the order in which the topics are discussed in the body of the article. It first gives context as to why Menzel didn't sing in the first film and Disney's plans to have her sing in Disenchanted, then Menken's writing of "Love Power", finally followed by the circumstances under which Menzel recorded it.--Changedforbetter (talk) 02:25, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Menken composed "Love Power" with" → "Menken composed the song with"
  • Because of the previous comment, I've left "Love Power" as-is here, and instead changed "the singer recorded "Love Power" in her home" to "the singer recorded it in her home".--Changedforbetter (talk) 02:25, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The third paragraph is too short; add the last two sentences of the second para to it to fix this
  • "Many reviewers also compared "Love Power"" → "Many reviewers also compared it"

Background and release[edit]

  • Img looks good!
  • First para is fine
  • "Although Menken claims he" → "Although Menken stated he" per WP:CLAIM
  • "in the closest of" → "in the closet of"

Use in Disenchanted[edit]

  • "inadvertently turns herself into" → "inadvertently turns her into"
  • "Nancy encourages Morgan to" → "Morgan is encouraged by her to" or something similar to avoid repetition of Nancy
  • "eleventh-hour song," → "11th-hour song," per MOS:NUM
  • "towards the end of the film." → "towards its ending."
  • Why is a capella spelt differently here from the lead?
  • The "for several weeks" part is not sourced, so reword to representing them having lived in isolation really
  • Removed "several weeks"; replaced with "due to lockdown measures".--Changedforbetter (talk) 03:21, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Music and lyrics[edit]

  • "with Blacke Taylor of Looper describing" → "with Taylor describing"
  • Introduce the Collider writer by name
  • Remove "in the world" at the end, as that part is not sourced
  • "that's true love"." → "that's true love."" per MOS:QUOTE on full sentences and add "Menzel said," at the start for attribution
  • Digital Spy should not be italicised
  • Remove the reintroduction to "Let it Go" at the combined part since this has already been done in this section

Reception[edit]

  • "received mixed reviews" → "was met with mixed reviews"
  • Too many refs are jumbled together; merge these using a note to avoid this
  • Are you sure The Northern Star, The Rice Thresher and The Spectator are not violations of WP:RSSM?
  • I would not consider them violations as they are subjective reviews and not stating facts.--Changedforbetter (talk) 20:15, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Img looks good!
  • If The Rice Thresher is kept justifiably, move the ref to being after that mention in the sentence instead unless you add them all as a note
  • Where is the repetitive part sourced for Mashable?
  • The writer of the article complains that "the song they've given her here is underwhelming and forces her to belt the phrase 'love power' over and over, which makes less sense the more you hear it."--Changedforbetter (talk) 20:27, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Italicise Den of Geek
  • Remove or replace New York Post per WP:RSP
  • "Benjamin Lee of The Guardian dismissed" → "Lee of The Guardian dismissed"
  • "Kayla Laguerre-Lewis of Screen Rant praised" → "Laguerre-Lewis of Screen Rant praised"
  • "Blake Taylor of Looper ranked" → "Taylor of Looper ranked"
  • "Douglas Laman of Collider ranked" → "Laman of Collider ranked"

Track listing[edit]

  • Good

Credits and personnel[edit]

  • Use {{spaced ndash}} so there is the right space between credits and personnel
  • Why are Engineer and Artist capitalised on one occasion each?

Release history[edit]

  • Format → Format(s)
  • The refs only back up a US release, not a various one

References[edit]

  • Copyvio score looks great at 27.0%!!!
  • Cite Mashable as publisher instead on ref 2
  • Cite D23 as publisher instead on refs 4 and 17
  • I doubt the reliability of ref 8 due to it being an entertainment site and lacking a proper team
  • Cite Scifi.com as publisher instead on ref 9
  • Cite PopSugar as publisher instead and fix MOS:QWQ issues with ref 11
  • Cite Zavvi as publisher instead on ref 13
  • Cite Collider as publisher instead on refs 14 and 53
  • Cite Spotify as publisher instead on ref 18
  • Cite Apple Music as publisher instead and fix MOS:QWQ issues with refs 19 and 28
  • Cite Looper as publisher instead on ref 20
  • Cite BroadwayWorld as publisher instead on refs 22 and 43
  • Cite Soundtrack.Net as publisher instead on refs 24 and 25
  • Fix MOS:QWQ issues and MOS:CAPS issues, citing Cision as publisher instead on ref 26
  • Cite Collider as publisher instead and fix MOS:QWQ issues with ref 27
  • Cite El Noticiero Digital as publisher instead on ref 29
  • Fix MOS:QWQ issues with ref 30
  • What exactly makes ref 32 a reliable source?
  • Cite Broadcast Music, Inc. as publisher instead on ref 35
  • Only include Musicnotes.com on ref 38, cited as publisher
  • Are you sure refs 39, 42, 49, 58 and 59 are not violations of WP:RSSM?
  • Remove or replace refs 41 and 45 per WP:RSP
  • As far as I am aware, Heavy.com (reference 45) is to be used with discretion. According to the database, "Heavy.com should not be relied upon for any serious or contentious statements, including dates of birth." I do not feel that Menzel describing the musical mood of the song is a contentious statement. This is also the only instance in which this source is cited.--Changedforbetter (talk) 05:19, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Removed the NYP source.--Changedforbetter (talk) 05:19, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cite Digital Spy as publisher instead on ref 46
  • Cite AllMusic as publisher instead on refs 48 and 65
  • Cite MovieWeb as publisher instead on ref 50
  • Remove or replace ref 61 per WP:FORBES
  • Cite Moviefone as publisher instead on ref 64
  • K. Peake Now that I have completed this section, I am hoping you could perhaps share some insight as to when it became mandatory (if it is, in fact, mandatory at all) for the names of certain publications to be cited as "Publisher" instead of a "Work", particularly websites, since these sources clearly already have a "Name of website" field in the reference template; or is this simply a matter of preference depending on the reviewer?--Changedforbetter (talk) 05:39, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Final comments and verdict[edit]

  •  On hold until all of the issues are fixed; took two days for this one! --K. Peake 16:58, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for your quick and detailed review. I begin addressing and responding to all points as soon as possible; please note that I may require a little longer than the typical 7 days to complete the responses (approximately three weeks at most).
    Thank you for your patience in the meantime. Changedforbetter (talk) 16:07, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    K. Peake Thank you for your patience. I've completed my revisions and responded to all points. Looking forward to further comments and/or verdict. Changedforbetter (talk) 05:39, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello, the only thing left to do is compile a list of refs for the stronger inclusion part, maybe with The Rice Thresher separate though. K. Peake 20:49, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Kyle Peake Okay, this has been done. Awaiting final verdict. Changedforbetter (talk) 05:17, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    ✓ Pass now, this looks totally clean fab job! --K. Peake 18:05, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Love_Power_(Disenchanted_song)/GA1&oldid=1171876035"