Talk:Sweet Dreams (Beyoncé song)/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: --Legolas (talk2me) 05:19, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jiveesh and Tbhotch. I will be reviewing the article in a moment. --Legolas (talk2me) 05:19, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Points[edit]

These are some points at the top of my head.

  1. WP:OVERLINK in the lead and the body of the article. You really don't need to link the charts in teh lead. Also, the lead needs further expansion.
    I think I fixed it. TbhotchTalk C. 16:18, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Instead of the music video in the infobox, its better to have it as part of the External links, that makes the article appear to have a end and cohesion.
    Per my comments here I don't think that is needed. TbhotchTalk C. 16:18, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  3. The Background and composition section needs rearrangement, at present its like Composition and background form. You get it?
    I get it, and changed. TbhotchTalk C. 16:18, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  4. The Promotion section goes to the last of the article sections, and the image of Knowles is a WP:NFCC#8 failing image, its not that different from those in the music video. Also, refernce 11 is not justified in claiming the performance of "Sweet Dreams" on the I Am... Tour.
    Removed the line TbhotchTalk C. 16:39, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Check reference 23 again. --Legolas (talk2me) 06:34, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Removed TbhotchTalk C. 16:39, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  6. "The single has peaked at number 48 on the Billboard Mainstream R&B/Hip Hop Chart, making I Am... Sasha Fierce the first album of the 21st century to have seven entries on the chart." — No source supporting this.
    removed too. TbhotchTalk C.
  7. The last para of the Chart Performance section is trivia, should be removed.
    Per WP:trivia, should be avoided a section called "Trivia", but these can be organized elsewhere. TbhotchTalk C. 16:39, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  8. File:Sweetdreamsvideo.jpg is again a NFCC failing image. Better would be the one where Knowles is dressed like a robot in a gold metallic dress. Unusual for her.
    I thought the same alot of times. TbhotchTalk C. 16:39, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Already done TbhotchTalk C.
  9. There are lot of instances of not using en-dash correctly.
    Could you be more specific about this? TbhotchTalk C. 16:43, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Vitruvian Man -> wikify
     Done TbhotchTalk C. 16:43, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Ref 58, unacceptable -> Piratebay is a torrent.
    Removed TbhotchTalk C. 16:55, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Why is Billboard suddenly placed in the middle of the End-of year charts?
    Actually it is "RIAA Charts – Billboard", so I fixed it. TbhotchTalk C. 16:55, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Certifications comes within charts section, and it is wrongly formatted.
    Fixed TbhotchTalk C. 16:55, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Correct the links and redirects. Also, many references are incomplete and lack accessdate/author/date/work etc parameters. Give a thorough copy edit.

Correct these first, then I can review the prose. 7 days as usual. --Legolas (talk2me) 06:34, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Non-reviewer comments[edit]

Resolved comments from Lil-unique1 (talk) 01:27, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Lead and infobox
  • The lead section requires copyediting. Current it lists the songs chart achievements almost becoming a mini chart performance section. It would be better to try and summarize this better. The lead also makes no mention of promotional appearances e.g. MTV Europe Music Awards (quite significant) or that the single was certified even though many other GA song articles mention these things.
done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 10:24, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
✗ Not done, whilst you've added new information the introduction still requires a thorough copy edit as once again it still leads a list in the third paragraph.
  • It appears that synthpop has been plucked out of the air. Its not mentioned elsewhere in the article and therefore the question is being asked, is this sourced? It either needs removing or it needs to be sourced and mentioned in the background section. And none of the sources appear to call it an R&B song. As do none of the sources saying which is in contrast to Knowles' previous R&B, hip hop and pop songs, (WP:OR)
done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 10:24, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
✗ Not done there is still no evidence of the song being R&B. Being nominated for the urban/R&B award does not count because urban and R&B are two seperate genres which have been bounded together for the award category. Unless a source speficially says "Sweet Dreams is an R&B song..." etc. it cannot be included in the infobox. http://newsongs.name/new-songs-album231838/Beyonce/Sweet-Dreams/

http://newsongs.name/new-songs-album231838/Beyonce/Sweet-Dreams/

Removed TbhotchTalk C. 01:08, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Done TbhotchTalk C. 06:09, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 10:24, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done

Background and composition
  • This section needs re-organsing. I would split it up into a seperate background section and then a composition section.
Is really needed split this? TbhotchTalk C. 06:28, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not required as we've agreed to leave sample where it is. --Lil-unique1 (talk) 06:38, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
not done per above. TbhotchTalk C.
 Done resolved --Lil-unique1 (talk) 23:09, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The comment about "BHG being released first needs to be put with all the other stuff about the song leaking because that together forms the background info.
moved TbhotchTalk C. 06:28, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Done
  • The phrase However, at the last minute, its release was scrapped, "BHG"'s release was not scrapped (it came afterwards) instead it was postponed till after "sweet dreams".
  • Also ref [7] needs to be moved because the comment Both tracks were taken from the Sasha Fierce disc, which contrasts with other joint-releases from this album where one track is taken from each disc. is not sourced by ref [7].
done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 10:56, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Done resolved
  • The statement By the album's release, the song's structure had been altered: the phrase "turn the lights on" had been repeated throughout the chorus, a third refrain had been added after the climax, and the name had been changed to its current title is nowhere in the MTV article.
done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 10:56, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
✗ Not done this information is not in the album notes nor is it in the MTV reference. It needs to be removed if a specific source for it cannot be found.
Removed TbhotchTalk C. 01:08, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • You also make no mention of the vocal range even though this info is provided at musicnotes.com and given at most other GAs.
"Sweet Dreams" is written in the key of E Minor, with a vocal range from D4 to F♯5 -> If this is not the vocal range I dont know what is TbhotchTalk C. 05:30, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Apologies. I didn't see that one. --Lil-unique1 (talk) 05:33, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The music sample would be better in the infobox as it would be closer to the info on Composition. There should be a template for this. Because in this case there is no reason to have it seperate.
"Would be better" is an opinion. It is in the "critical" for one of the reviews, the caption would say it better. TbhotchTalk C. 05:33, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Done fair play, that's justified. Someone may come along later and ask the same thing but you have a good answer to that. --05:34, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Chart performance
  • As of June 25, 2009, "Sweet Dreams" has been the number-one most added song on Australian radio doesn't sound correct. The source says it was the number one added song last week meaning in the week ending June 18, 2010 it was the most added song to AUS radio.*
done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 11:10, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
✗ Not done. What i mean was that the article should say "in the week ending June 18, it was the most added song to Australian radio stations". Using "As of..." it makes it sound as if up until the 18 June it was the most added song. Which would be a different claim to the source. It was only the most added song for one week but this is not made clear in the current way it is written. --Lil-unique1 (talk) 23:09, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
reworded. TbhotchTalk C. 01:08, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It stayed within the top 10 for nine consecutive weeks. this comment is unsourced.

done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 11:10, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per WP:LINK do countries really need linking?
done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 11:10, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Erm why is the 'unofficial remix mentioned'? Firstly it is sourced from YouTube which is a copyright violation and secondly it may not be sourced from a WP:reliable source. Also as its unofficial, it didn't chart and didn't recieve media coverage why is it notable?
done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 11:10, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Music video
  • The whole section needs reorganising. The information should be arranged into background (which appears directly below the ==Music video== heading with no sub-heading), then the concept followed by the reception. The information is not currently split properly into these sections.  Done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 20:30, 24 July 2010 (UTC) Comments like "It's basically saying that this relationship is so wonderful that it scares me... is it a sweet dream or beautiful nightmare?" are part of the concept etc.[reply]
done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 18:12, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Currently the layout is confusing and uncohesive.

done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 20:30, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
✗ Not done removed the section header ===Background and release===, the first section directly beneath the main heading of 'Music Video' should be just above the release. This phrase also needs to go to the concept section, The music video was said to be a more "graphic" video than the others and its motive was said to be "take Sasha to the next level", as stated by Knowles in the B-roll footage of Above and Beyoncé - Video Collection & Dance Mixes
I think that I did it. TbhotchTalk C. 01:08, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ref [60] does not support that comment: At the final London Show of her I Am... Tour on November 2009, Knowles sang the full version of "Sweet Dreams" on the B-Stage for the first time, instead of a snippet or an acoustic version.. Ref [60] links to a peformance at Wynn Las Vegas.

done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 18:12, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
✗ Not done the source doesnt say performed in London.
I see nothing about this on MV section. TbhotchTalk C. 01:13, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The video was not included on Above and Beyoncé - Video Collection & Dance Mixes as it was not finished by the time the CD/DVD collection was made.[citation needed] -> This is in a hidden note on the section, I removed it because there is not source for the fact. TbhotchTalk C. 06:03, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 18:12, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not quite what I meant. I meant why is it not mentioned the behind the scenes footage on the set of "Sweet Dreams" is included Above ande Beyonce? I've found once source here [1] and it could also be sourced from Above and Beyonce's album credits. --Lil-unique1 (talk) 06:30, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 18:12, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Promotion
  • Remove the image of Beyoncé drinking a bottle of water. It is in breach of WP:NFCC#8 as the image does not add sinficantly to reader understanding of the article and/or subject. The words already described the image well as the image adds no more understanding or context to the point being made. Additionally two non-free images (this and music video one) cannot be supported when the rational for one (the advert) is weak.
done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 18:12, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 65 is a performance at Wyn Las Vegas not London. This needs to be addressed as it conflicts with the info stated. --Lil-unique1 (talk) 23:09, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Removed TbhotchTalk C. 01:13, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Credits and personnel
done TbhotchTalk C. 20:51, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Done
Charts
 Not done the charts are still WP:OVERLINKed. Some of the links for year-end charts are the same as the single charts therefore they need to be removed. --Lil-unique1 (talk) 22:45, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Removed overlink of the section TbhotchTalk C. 22:58, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per WP:USCHARTS Billboard should only appear in front of the Hot 100. Pop Songs → Mainstream Top 40 (Pop Songs)
Done TbhotchTalk C. 05:59, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Removed. TbhotchTalk C. 22:58, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • US End of year charts are named incorrectly. I don't know why you've added RIAA to the front of them all when none of the other charts have their industry body and all the rest are listed by country. The correct names are (As show when you go to them):
    • US Billboard Hot 100: Best of 2009
    • US Hot Dance Club Play - Best of 2009
    • US Radio Songs - Best of 2009.
 Done but w/o the "Best of 2009." is redundant. TbhotchTalk C. 20:51, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Certificate providers should not be in small text as this is not accessible. Please place these in a seperate column alongside.
 Done Merged TbhotchTalk C. 21:59, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove billboard from succession & procession and give these a subheading as there is quite a few of them.
 Done TbhotchTalk C. 21:59, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinon there's a lot to change here so I would have failed it based on all of the above considering that in addition to this like Legolas suggested there are many ref fixes and also copy editing to be done. Sorry if it sounded harsh but compared to some of the other GAs others have passed there is some way to go yet... --Lil-unique1 (talk) 05:20, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Im almost happy with the comments I made though I disapprove of the way the certifications are given. Both the country and the provider should be given as both are necessary components of the certification. Piping the country to the provider is misleading and misses out vital information. --Lil-unique1 (talk) 02:50, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Could you give an example?, I am following the Poker Face (Lady Gaga song) format. TbhotchTalk C. 02:52, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Granted, the way you have done it is present in 5 random GAs and 2 FAs I checked, per the manual of style for linking (in reference to the section about piping, shortcut: WP:EGG) and the page in general a specific link is preferred. Countries don't issue certificates but providers (industry bodies) do. Both the country and industry provider should be given. --Lil-unique1 (talk) 03:00, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Side note: remove category: Rhythmic Airplay Number Ones (I think its called that), its not sourced.
Both done TbhotchTalk C. 03:06, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Further comments[edit]

Lil's points really helped improve the article. However, there are still futher issues.

  1. "Lyrically, the song describes a relationship where the protagonist feels that this is beautiful, and she believes that is a dream." — Sounds little amateurish. Maybe "Lyrically, the song describes a beautiful relationship, which the singer believes could be a dream." Use could be as the lyrics never directly calls it a dream.  Done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 09:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2. "The song went on to be certified Platinum by the ARIA, the RIANZ and the RIAA. The song was nominated for the "Viewers Choice Award" at the 2010 BET Awards." — Consecutive sentences starting with "The song"  Done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 09:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  3. "It peaked inside the top five in Australia, Russia, the United Kingdom, the Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, Ireland and Slovakia" — An arrangement needs to be done. Either arrange alphabetically, or descending order of market value.  Done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 09:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  4. "The golden robot suit that Knowles wears to symbolize her Sasha Fierce alter-ego in it, was designed by French fashion designer Thierry Mugler." — Is it that important a statement for the WP:LEAD? Its better to have a synopsis of the music video.  Done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 09:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  5. "It was written and produced by Knowles along with Jim Jonsin, Wayne Wilkins and Rico Love." — "It was written and produced by Knowles, along with Jim Jonsin, Wayne Wilkins and Rico Love."  Done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 09:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  6. "The song was leaked in March 2008" — was leaked?? This implies somebody from inside leaked it or the record company did it. If so, this needs expansion. If not, rephrase.  Done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 09:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  7. "you put the song out there it would go" — incomplete direct quote. Could be xtended with the [ ] braces. Like "you put the song out there it would go [on to become a hit]"  Done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 09:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  8. "earmarked" — sure there is a better word.  Done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 09:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  9. "Its lyrics describe a relationship so great and the protagonist believes that she is dreaming" — As stated before.  Done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 09:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  10. "The song's electronic baseline is compared to Michael Jackson's "Beat It".[1][8] By the album's release, the song's structure had been altered: the phrase "turn the lights on" had been repeated throughout the chorus, a third refrain had been added after the climax, and the name had been changed to its current title.[3]" — Again, there's no relation between the sentences, and no flow. While rearranging you forgot that the leak came before teh relase. Hence they should be noted as such. Secondly, you are suddenly, "out of the blue" drawing a MJ "Beat It" comparison, without establishing the genre of the song.  Done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 09:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  11. "The Times was impressed with the song" — The Times cannot be impressed, rather the reviewr can.  Done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 09:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  12. "The official single "Sweet Dreams" debuted on the Billboard Hot 100 at number 97" — No need for official single, Billboard doesnot allow leaks anyways.  Done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 09:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  13. "Sweet Dreams" was certified Gold on October 28, 2009, and it was later certified Platinum on January 5, 2010" — Missing by whom it was certified.  Done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 09:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  14. File:Flickr_-_smilesea_-_Beyoncé_I_Am..._Tour_Newcastle_03.jpg needs to be made left, per MOS:IMAGES  Done Jivesh boodhun (talk) 09:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More coming up later.... --Legolas (talk2me) 04:11, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Waiting Jivesh boodhun (talk) 09:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Both done TbhotchTalk C. 06:29, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ahh, I don't see any other pending issues with it, therefore I award GA to the article. Congratulations and well deserved Tbhotch and Jiveesh bodhun. — Legolas (talk2me) 08:08, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thak you Legolas and Lil-unique for thake your time reviewing it. TbhotchTalk C. 17:00, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sweet_Dreams_(Beyoncé_song)/GA1&oldid=1141744034"