Talk:Already Gone (Kelly Clarkson 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: HJMitchell You rang? 06:23, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article appears stable, it is very well written, comprehensive and referenced where required. I see no obvious impediments to GA status so this should be fairly quick (now I've got round to it, apologies for the delay). However, since you're aiming for eventual FA status, I'll be thorough and we'll get into the minutiae. HJMitchell You rang? 16:17, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

minor, general points

  • careful with the apostrophes (yeah, that winds me up!)
  • name "the song" or "the music video" for the first mention in each section
  • careful with the ""- make sure Already Gone is always in "" or ''. I've corrected it at least once and I've not seen it again, but be careful

Specifics

  • Lead:
    • the 2nd sentence (I think) the article says "It appears on..." (album)- Is it worth tweaking to join the previous sentence with "from.." or "appearing on..." or something similar?
    • I would suggest bringing the first mention of Tedder further up (i.e first sentence) for example "performed by Kelly Clarkson and cowritten by Clarkson and Ryan Tedder..." or something similar
      • I tried it there, but I think it made the sentence too long. After connecting the first two sentences as suggested above, it now appears in the second sentence, and I think that should be okay. Matthewedwards :  Chat 
    • There needs to be some explanation of the chronology- especially when the song was written- because it goes on to talk about Halo which was released before Already Gone- do I take it AG was written before Halo?
      • As far as I know, yes. His collaborations with Kelly were the first he'd done with another artist, apparently. It just happened that Beyonce's album was released first. I think I've explained this better now. Matthewedwards :  Chat 
    • It jumps straight from Clarkson's objections to AG's release to her promotion of it. I know there's only so much detail we can cram into the lead but the impression is given that she just 'got over it' and went out promoting a song she thinks is a rip off of Beyonce. The stuff about her objections should be wrapped up a little neater to clarify that.
      • Not sure how to address this properly. I read in some forum somewhere that Clive Davis had threatened to stop promoting the album completely if she did not promote the single, but I can't find a RS for this. I guess she had no choice in it -- she is locked into a contract, after all. Matthewedwards :  Chat 


  • Background and release:
    • The sentence "She noticed distinct similarities between "Halo", for which Tedder received co-writer and producer credits,[5] and confronted Tedder for using the same arrangement on two different songs" does not make it clear that the song to which Halo is allegedly similar is AG. It's implied, but I'd advise spelling it out.
    • ""fought and fought" with her bosses to prevent it from being released... She wanted "Cry" to be released as the album's third single"- the prose seems quite weak there, especially compared with the rest of the article. Not a GA issue but it's worth fixing and it might hold back an FAC.
    • "Later told MTV..."- is there a date (or just a month would do) for "later"?
  • Composition:
    • The Hartford Courant is italicised but not linked the first time it's mentioned, but it is linked further down. Link the first mention (mainly so people like me don't the "what the **** is the Hartford Courant?"). Linking it after that is personal choice I suppose as long as you don't overlink
    • "although he has done nothing wrong in their relationship, it was never meant to be and is destined for failure. She tells her partner that he could not have been any better, and therefore, to avoid hurting him in the future, he should move on, as she is already gone" reads like song lyrics. If that's what they are, they belong in quote marks ("").
  • Music video:
    • "The music video" should read something like "The music video for 'Already Gone'"
    • Who said ""lounging on chaises and lolling around ... while 'zazzed [sic] out in the sort of gowns and jewels we've yet to spot this girl-next-door pop star wearing in real life".[16]"? I realise it's referenced, but it can't hurt to name whomever you're quoting.
      • I'm finding it difficult to put this information in without messing up the structure of the sentence. Do you have any ideas?
    • "On July 22..."- I assume this in 2009, but the article ought to say so really
  • Live performances:
    • No real issues here. It must be said it reads rather like a "critical reception" section, but that may be unavoidable and, seeing as the reviews are of the performance, not the song, I don't think it's an issue.
      • I didn't want to just list a bunch of verrifiable places that she sung at; I think this provides more notability for the live performances. Matthewedwards :  Chat 
  • Critical reception
    • "About.com's Top 40 Pop called "Already Gone"" is weak. Is there a name for the reviewer so we can say "X of About.com..."?
    • Does the mention of the Daily Star really add anything? It may be slightly unfair of me but most of what's printed in that publication drivel and considering all the reviewer had to say of note was "it's way better than Halo", I'm not convinced there's any point having it there. Feel free to disagree on that though.
    • Consistency- ideally, when talking about reviewers and publications, go with "person of place" [my personal preference] (John Smith of A Newspaper said...) or "place's person" (A Newspaper''s John Smith) but try to avoid using both in the same article and certainly both in the same paragraph.
    • I have some issues with the prose in the last paragraph- "The song did receive some criticism...". Aside from an inanimate object "receiving" and arguments over whether one does "receive" negative criticism, I think you should just go straight in with a "However, X wrote Y" or "However, not all reviews were positive; X wrote that Y was Z"
  • Chart performance
    • "In North America, "Already Gone" entered the Billboard Hot 100 and Canadian Hot 100 charts at number 70 on 28 March 2009,[48] due to digital download sales of the album track, which was released two weeks earlier.[49]" is not very pleasant to read. I'd suggest:
...entered the Billboard Hot 100 and Canadian Hot 100 charts on 28 March 2009 (verb) at number 70... but you need to clarify what was due to digital download sales because it doesn't seem to make sense like that.

I've yet to check references- a cursory look at the list and at the cite temps suggests nothing alarming and I doubt there's anything there to stop a GAN. However, minor point for a future FAC- "work" and "publisher" in cite templates- for example, the Daily Mirror ref I mentioned above doesn't specify a publisher (Express Newspapers Ltd for the record). Have fun! Do feel free to drop me a line if you want anything clarified or I can do anything else useful. I'm watching this page and the article so I'll check up on improvements from time to time. HJMitchell You rang? 20:26, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review. Let me know if there's anything new with regards to the new edits. Best, Matthewedwards :  Chat  03:47, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Already_Gone_(Kelly_Clarkson_song)/GA1&oldid=1142752016"