Talk:Raging Fire (song)
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Raging Fire (song) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Wikipedia is not a fan site[edit]
What's written in the page is too similar to uncritical fan treatment of the subject matter. Please don't dump everything you can find on the web into this page, and also please write it in a more neutral tone. It reads like something written by an over-enthusiastic fan lacking discrimination on what to put in a page. Hzh (talk) 23:55, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- Are you trying to make it easier for yourself to read? I took notes from a GOOD Article which was Beautiful and yes my goal was to actually add in more info to make this my first Good Class article, until you had to ruin it. I also took examples from Born This Way. If you just hate the fact that this is a long-ass article, then fine, go ahead ITS RIGHT THERE, EDIT IT SOME MORE. And in the lead descriptions, is it necessary to remove those? Smarty9108 (talk) 1:58, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- And I don't even understand what's the "uncritical fan treatment"? IF you look at the loads of the reviews, the song received critical acclaim from music critics regardless, and where does it say "oh this is the greatest song ever!" If this is too enthusiastic for you? Smarty9108 (talk) 2:05, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- Are you trying to make it easier for yourself to read? I took notes from a GOOD Article which was Beautiful and yes my goal was to actually add in more info to make this my first Good Class article, until you had to ruin it. I also took examples from Born This Way. If you just hate the fact that this is a long-ass article, then fine, go ahead ITS RIGHT THERE, EDIT IT SOME MORE. And in the lead descriptions, is it necessary to remove those? Smarty9108 (talk) 1:58, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- It has already been explained in the edit summary. Do not give excessive quote, do not use website like Perez Hilton for music criticism. I do not understand how you could say you used Beautiful or Born This Way as examples, did you read how they do their critical reception section? Quotes are only brief, a couple of sentences from each reviewer at most, not long stretches of prose as you did (an entire paragraph from a minor reviewer!). Note also these have extensive coverage from multiple good sources, not sites like Perez Hilton or Examiner.com (both of which I have removed). I have in fact been asked to review articles submitted for good article status, and I can tell you that I would have failed this article as it was in no uncertain terms. Hzh (talk) 11:40, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
- Also you should know that site such as Yahoo Voices and About.com are not considered reliable sites as they are self-publish. While I think it is fine to quote their opinions if they are considered expert in the field, I don't see how the contributors you quoted can be considered established experts in the field, and you should not give such prominence to their opinions. The sourcing is poor and lacking in discrimination. Hzh (talk) 12:08, 24 May 2014 (UTC)