Jump to content

Talk:Living in a Ghost Town/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: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 05:45, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Nice to see such a recently released song in the nominations list; I will review this soon! --K. Peake 05:45, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox and lead

[edit]
  • Change recorded date to 2019–2020 in the infobox
  •  Not done Why would this be better?
  •  Done Excellent point.
  • Where are the studios sourced from? If it is part of the credits/personnel, then add that to the section.
  •  Done Removed as unsourced.
  • Remove wikilink on Matt Clifford since his article does not exist
  •  Done
  • Remove [1] from the infobox since you do not add refs; however, I notice that The Glimmer Twins are the only producers not included in the personnel; mistake here?
  •  Done Matt Clifford was not sourced but the personnel section explicitly says that Jagger and Richards produced the song.
  •  Not done I am not going to link someone to Google's surveillance network. Why would I do that?
  • I know there is. I'm not going to add that.
  • Nothing there says that music video links are obligatory and certainly nothing about YouTube. I am not going to add a link to YouTube: why are you insisting on this?
  • The lead is currently too short since it is missing a good amount of information such as the genres of the song and chart performance; I will order how to add this appropriately below and it should be two paragraphs instead of one para.
  • The second sentence should instead be "The song was produced by..." but this needs to be written out in the first section since the sources are there for it
  •  Not done I don't understand you.
  • I don't think that needs to be in the lead, especially since there isn't any running text about Don Was.
  • It now covers some material about every section below.
  •  Done
  • "making it the first Rolling Stones single" → "This made the song the Rolling Stones' first single" with this being a new sentence instead
  •  Not done
  • I don't understand you. If this is a small thing, please just amend it yourself.
  • The four year statement in this sentence is not sourced in the body; fix this
  •  Done
  • You should follow this with a new sentence about the genres of the song and add lyrics information if you can sourced that in the body first
  •  Done
  • Start a new para here and the opening sentence should start as ""Living in a Ghost Town" was recorded during..." since this should not only come before the critical reception, but should be a different sentence
  •  Not done
  • Source?
  • Rearranged
  • "for a forthcoming studio album that the band has been working on since 2015." → "of the Rolling Stones in 2019, ultimately being finished the following year."
  •  Not done I don't understand you.
  • Again, if this is some small thing, I can't understand what you want: just change it yourself.
  • "The song has received positive reviews from critics" → "The song received generally positive reviews from music critics" with the appropriate target and add what was praised/commented on
  •  Done
  • The following sentence should mention some of the notable chart positions of the song
  •  Not done this is arbitrary
  • Saying that the lead is short is one thing but the remedy is not to insert original research.
  • What are objectively "notable chart positions"? This is the point I'm making.
  • Last sentence of this para should be about the accompanying music video
  •  Done

Recording and composition

[edit]
  • Retitle to Background and composition
  •  Not done No need
  • I disagree. If this matters so much, someone else can change it.
  • "Since 2017, the band had been" → "Since 2017, the Rolling Stones had been"
  •  Done
  • "but had to stop" → "but had to stop touring in 2020"
  •  Done
  • "to raise money" → "helping raise money"
  •  Done
  • "during the crisis." → "during the pandemic."
  •  Not done: overuse of the word "pandemic"; no need to repeat it over and over again
  • "On 23 April, the band released 'Living in a Ghost Town' online." → "On 23 April of that year, the band released "Living in a Ghost Town" as a single." with the target
  •  Not done I have no clue why you keep writing "with the target"...?
  • That makes less sense: what are "directing words"?
  • I mean the words being DIRECTED to a Wikipedia article, it is like a wikilink basically. This should not be hard to understand... --K. Peake 09:47, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sometimes you include this language and sometimes you just write "finished remotely and is their" → "finished remotely, marking their" so that makes it confusing. I have never seen anyone refer to "directing words" in Wikipedia.
  • "finished remotely and is their" → "finished remotely, marking their"
  •  Done
  • "Jagger claims to have" → "Mick Jagger, a founder member of the Rolling Stones, claimed to have" with the appropriate wikilink
  •  Done mostly
  •  Done
  • "being a ghost existing after" → "being a ghost after"
  •  Done
  • "labeled 'Living in a Ghost Town' as" → "labeled "Living in a Ghost Town" as"
  •  Not done this is written in British English
  •  Not done en-GB
  • "'a slow-paced chug with a tint of reggae'," → ""a slow-paced chug with a tint of reggae","
  •  Not done en-GB
  •  Done
  • "'vintage reggae flavour' in" → ""vintage reggae flavour" to"
  •  Not done en-GB
  • "'stabbing, echoing organ'," → ""stabbing, echoing organ"," with the target
  •  Not done en-GB, common term
  •  Not done Valid redirect.
  • It's not under the "Metal Hammer" brand or at that domain name.
  • Does WP:TARGET say that? Where are you getting this?
  • "calling it 'a relaxed piece of reggae-infused rock'." → "called it "a relaxed piece of reggae-infused rock"." with the target
  •  Not done everyone is familiar with rock music and adding links inside of quotations is discouraged
  • Again, "rock" is a very common term.
  • Add some info about the lyrical content of the song after this genre description
  •  Not done There already is some, I don't have anything else sourced to add here.

Release and reception

[edit]
  • "The initial release was digital-only, accompanied" → "The song was initially released for digital download and streaming as a single on 23 April 2020, being accompanied"
  •  Done
  •  Done
  • "with footage taken from across the world of empty city streets." → "with footage of empty city streets that was taken from across the world."
  •  Done
  • "The band have plans to resume No Filter once the pandemic subsides" → "Once the pandemic subsides, the Rolling Stones plan to resume the No Filter Tour"
  •  Done
  • "the single is a means of keeping" → "the single was done to keep"
  •  Not done This is less clear: it's the release not the "doing" of the single that is relevant.
  • "promoting the album's worth of new material" → "for promotion of their upcoming album"
  •  Done
  • "and purple vinyl single exclusive" → "and purple vinyl, both of which are exclusive" with the target
  •  Done
  • "online store and an orange vinyl single for" → "online store, and an orange vinyl for sale by"
  •  Done
  • Are you sure the releases are still forthcoming since they are apparently out now?
  • No.
  •  Done
  •  Done
  • "it 'their best new song in years', with" → "it the Rolling Stones' "best new song in years", placing"
  •  Done
  • Remove wikilink on reggae
  •  Done
  •  Done
  • "that the pacing and mood" → "that the song's pacing and mood"
  •  Done
  • "of being in lockdown." → "of being in lockdown during the pandemic."
  •  Done
  • "agrees that the single" → "opined that the single"
  •  Done
  • "'right on time'" → ""right on time","
  •  Not done en-GB
  • The NME review should come last in this para since it is the most critical review
  •  Not done How does that make sense?
  • Source?
  • This is an essay, there is nothing normative here.
  • "a 'a rushed and half-baked comment on our current predicament'," → ""a rushed and half-baked comment on our current predicament","
  •  Not done en-GB
  • "as 'Jagger perhaps doesn’t" → "noting that "Jagger perhaps doesn't"
  •  Not done en-GB
  • "fishnet safety packages'." → "fishnet safety packages"."
  •  Not done en-GB
  • "of the week and" → "of the week, and"
  •  Not done en-GB
  • Good point: sorry for that.
  • "recommended this track." → "recommended the track."
  •  Not done en-GB
  • I disagree but my reasoning above was faulty again.
  •  Done
  • "but it 'rocks harder" → "but "rocks harder"
  •  Not done en-GB
  • Wow. Again, I was just wrong.
  • "song to rock'." → "song to rock"."
  •  Not done en-GB
  • "On 3 July," → "On 3 July 2020,"
  •  Done
  •  Done
  • "after the song was released on vinyl in several different special editions," → "after several different special editions were released for the song,"
  •  Done
  • "on this chart and the artist with the" → "on the chart and giving them the"
  •  Done
  •  Done
  • "than in the past few weeks" → "than they were for the past few weeks"
  •  Done
  • "in the German Charts is purely sales-dependent and does" → "for the German Charts being purely sales-dependent; it does"
  •  Done
  • Add more chart positions that are notable here, such as Scotland and Hungary
  •  Not done How are some "more notable"? Where is any narrative text about the Hungarian charts?
  • That's redundant and doesn't give any meaningful context. The German charts one does but I don't have any for the Hungarian charts.
  • There's still nothing to write.

Personnel

[edit]
  • Where are the studios?
  •  Not done I don't know and studios aren't persons
  • There is no source for the Rolling Stones credits; add at the top of the section "Credits adapted from..." and then provide the appropriate source there
  •  Done
  • Where are the mentions of the Glimmer Twins members?
  •  Done
  • Remove redundant wikilinks
  •  Not done: it's fine to link to someone's name in a list; otherwise, the list would look unbalanced
  •  Done

Charts

[edit]
  • Chart performance for 'Living in a Ghost Town' → Chart performance for "Living in a Ghost Town"
  •  Not done en-GB
  •  Done

Release history

[edit]
  • Release formats for 'Living in a Ghost Town' → Release dates and formats for "Living in a Ghost Town"
  •  Done
  • The region col is missing, which should be the first one
  •  Not done "Missing"? "Should"? Based on what?
  • Source?
  • There is nothing messy about this table. Adding a useless column would make it more messy.
  • Ref col is missing too, which should be the one after the label col
  •  Not done That is ugly, unnecessary, less accessible and I will never do that: the rows are properly sourced.
  • Format → Format(s)
  •  Not done
  • Source?
  •  Done
  •  Not done
  • I copied and pasted what you wrote above.
  • Make sure the appropriate refs are invoked in the col
  •  Not done What are you talking about? There is nothing to be references in "in the col"???
  • I can't even parse that sentence. What are you talking about "when you have adding the col"? I sincerely can't even read that.
  • I realize that "col" means "column": "when you have adding the column" is nonsense. What does "when you have adding the column" mean?

See also

[edit]
  •  Not done: this is not an improvement
  •  Not done: this is not an improvement

References

[edit]
  • Make sure all of these are archived by using the tool
  •  Not done: what are you talking about "using the tool"?
  • Click on "Fix dead links" under Revision history
  •  Done
  •  Done
  •  Not done: it's fine to link to the source in the citation
  • For all instances that I put this, it is because sources should only be wikilinked to once
  • Source?
  • Source (again)?
  • Zane Lowe should be authorlinked on ref 7, and lay his name out in the same manner as the other authors
  •  Not done: this is not an improvement
  • Not even sure why I wrote that, since I did what you asked.
  • Authorlink Will Hodgkinson on ref 9
  •  Done
  •  Not done: valid redirect
  • Addressed this earlier in the article review
  • See above
  • WP:OVERLINK of GQ on ref 11
  •  Not done: it's valid to link to the source
  • WP:OVERLINK of Rolling Stone on ref 12
  •  Not done: it's valid to link to the source
  • Remove redundant wikilink on Super Deluxe Edition for ref 13
  •  Not done: redundant to what...?
  • WP:OVERLINK of Vulture on ref 14
  •  Not done: it's valid to link to the source
  • Fix MOS:QWQ issues with ref 17 and cite Stereogum as website instead
  •  Done: for quotation, why use "website" instead of "publisher"?
  • If so, then it should be in the running text as well, which I changed
  • Are you sure ref 38 is required; if yes, then target AllMusic Guide to AllMusic
  •  Done
[edit]
  • Remove AOTY, MusicBrainz, RYM and MSN.com
  •  Not done: why would I do that?
  • How is MusicBrainz "useless" but Discogs isn't? You aren't explaining yourself.

Final comments and verdict

[edit]