Talk:Write on Me/GA3
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA Review[edit]
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Aoba47 (talk · contribs) 04:55, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
- Grabbing this for a review. Will get to it later in the week. Aoba47 (talk) 04:55, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
- Lead and infobox
- I do not believe that the references in the genre parameter of the infobox are necessary. The information and the sources should be in the body of the article.
- For the first sentence of the first paragraph, please include the year in which the album was released.
- For this part (Critics noted a slower melody from the group's previous songs), I would revise it to (Critics noted that it had a slower melody from the group’s previous songs) as I do not think the original wording makes sense.
- For this part (Lyrically, the song is a companionship anthem), I am not sure about the phrase “companionship anthem” as it borders on editorializing the information. I would change this to make the tone more objective.
- I am not sure what is meant by this part “to that individual”. I would remove it all together as the sentence would make sense without it.
- For this part (Inspired by the lack of ballads on their previous records, they wanted), clarify the “they”.
- I would add a short descriptive phrase in front of Camila Cabello to indicate that she is a member of the group (at least at the time in which the song was recorded and released).
- For these sentences ("Write on Me" was the last promotional single before the group released their album. Upon release, the song charted in Czech Republic and Scotland. As part of the track's promotion, the group performed the song for the first time at Wango Tango, two weeks before the album's release.), the word “release” appears quite a lot. I would revise at least one of the instances to avoid the repetition.
- This is more of a clarification question, but has Fifth Harmony performed the song during off their future tours past the 7/27 promotional cycle?
Done
- Background and release
- This part (Then-member Camila Cabello and Ally Brooke) is somewhat confusing as Ally Brooke is not identified and the sentence can be misread as Brooke also being a “then-member”.
- This phrase (found the track to showcase the group's vulnerability in separate interviews.) is written rather awkwardly and would benefit from revision.
- For this part (While recording music for their sophomore album,), identify the album by name, link it, and include the year in which it was released.
- Link Fifth Harmony on its first use in the body of the article.
- I would put the second sentence of the first paragraph first as it would make more sense to talk about the group as a whole and then go into individual members’ opinions.
- I would rephrase “keen in” to something more formal.
- I would use “ballad” instead of “ballad number”.
- For this part (This was something that was not very present in their debut album), I would avoid starting a sentence with “This”.
- The sentence structure for this (This was something that was not very present in their debut album, Reflection (2015), she recalled that this type of material was not present on their debut album, Reflection (2015), and she and her bandmate wanted to change it.) needs work and I would revise this sentence completely. It also seems a little repetitive as you already said in the previous sentence that they wanted to include more ballads for their second album.
- The second instance of “Reflection” should be in italics.
- There is no reason to include the year in which the album was released for the second instance you mention the debut album.
- Make sure punctuation is on the outside of quotation marks unless you are citing a full quote.
- Is this part (When the group revealed the track list on May 6, 2016, on Instagram,) really necessary in the sentence? I do not find it particularly useful, and would cut it.
- For this part (Cabello stated that this was her personal favorite song,), say “it” instead of “this”.
- I would include the information on the songwriting and production in this section. You also need to make sure that all of the information from the “Credits and personnel” section are present in the prose (i.e. the recording locations and who recorded, mixed, and mastered the song). This sort of information is normally put under the “Background” section as it does not really make sense to put it in a “Composition” section.
- Done
- Composition
- Are there any sources out there in which music critics talk about the lyrics of the song?
- This part (it uses synths, tambourines, an acoustic guitar and finger-snaps.) needs a citation.
- For this part (Music critics characterized the song as a "slow melody" in comparison to Fifth Harmony's previous works.), you mention multiple “critics”, but you only have one source/critic so this is not supported by citations.
- I would say “as having a” rather than “as a”.
- Revise this sentence (As noted by Sasha Geffen from MTV, who described the song as blending "acoustic guitar chords with tropical synths", while using a calm instrumentation instead of "big beats”.) as it awkwardly constructed.
- Sasha Geffen is writing for MTV News not MTV. Change the prose and the citation to reflect this.
Done
- Reception
- Revise the image caption to the following (Music critics compared “Write on Me” to to the musical style of Kygo (pictured in 2013).) to make it clear why the image is in this section.
- There is not much structure to this section. It seems a little too much like a random assortment of critics and their opinions. Please look at this resource (Wikipedia:Copyediting reception sections) to see how to better create a narrative for a reception section. The narrative can be as simple as this song got primarily positive reviews upon its release. But, something is needed here to help the readers.
- I would avoid this kind of language (, like Benjamin,) as it implies that there is a connection between the two (in which they really communicate with each other) and that borders on speculation/reaching if that makes sense.
- You need to include information on the song’s commercial performance in this section.
Done
- Background and concept
- For this part (She elaborated this by stating that the video), just say “She stated that the video”.
- For this part (as well as their "beauty shots" which is a), I would a comma after “shots”.
- Synopsis
- Add ALT text for the screenshot.
- For this part of the image caption (received commentary from music critics over its simplistic direction compared to the group's previous works.), I do not see citations in this section to support this? This is important, as if this information cannot be found and sourced, then the image is not necessary and should be removed.
- I would add a short descriptive phrase in front of Lauren Jauregui.
- Is there anything out there about the critical response to the video?
- External links
- Include the link for the MetroLyrics page for this song (It is an official lyrics website that is included on a majority of Wikipedia articles for songs). The link is here.
Done
- Final comments
- Great work with this. Once my comments are addressed, I will pass this. Have a wonderful rest of your week! Aoba47 (talk) 01:48, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
- Questions about "Music video" section
- Thank you for addressing everything! I just have one more comment before I will pass this. Thank you for providing the references for the music video screenshot caption. However, the actual prose of the section does not mention anything about the critical reception of the video. Also, I checked the sources in the caption, and I cannot find the information about the "simplistic direction" note in the Teen Vogue source. The source mentions that the song has a slower melody, but that does not mean the video is slower/more simplistic than their previous ones. The following quotes from the source ("and it's a black-and-white dream", "It's black and white and gorgeous all over", and "the concept definitely does the lyrics justice") could be used/paraphrased to talk about the video's reception. For the Rolling Stone source, I see the part where the critic calls the video "simple", but I do not see the comparison between this video and their past videos. So tl;dr: 1) I do not believe that the captions in the music video screenshot caption supports the claim and 2) do you think that you could find critical responses for the video to put in the prose (if not, then I understand as the video might not have received a lot of criticism or been overshadowed). Sorry for the long comment lol. Aoba47 (talk) 16:43, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
- @Aoba47: I have finally added more sources to support those information (plus commentaries by critics) and removed that "compared to their previous works" part, this is already mentioned several time in the article, I don't think is necessary highlight this one more time. I hope it's good now! Haha. What do you think? –UrbanJE (talk) 15:30 15 February 2018 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.