Jump to content

Talk:Open Your Heart (Madonna 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

I think it is a very good article. If anything it is a little too long, but that's no big deal. If you want add a citation or two in the overview, but that's about it. I'm passing it. BillyJack193 (talk) 18:58, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Starting review.Pyrotec (talk) 19:36, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Initial review

[edit]

The article is readable, has a good scope and is well-referenced. It appears to be at the right level to acheive GA-status without too much work.

I will now go through it in detail again, but leaving the WP:lead until last.Pyrotec (talk) 20:22, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As above, this article is generally at or about GA-level. At present, I'm just concentrating on minor "problems/defects":

  • Critical response
  • The first paragraph states "Author Nicholas B. Dirks, in his book Culture/power/history reviewed the song ....". Well there are three editors, so is it his book (possibly 1/3rd of it is his)? Are you refering to a particular chapter in the book, with a named author who happens to be Nicholas B. Dirks?
  • Musical video
  • In contrast to the information provided about the song, its not clear from this section, the WP:lead, or the Info box, when the video was made. The first paragraph says, it was nominated for three wards in 1987, so perhaps its late 1986 to 1987?
The WP:lead is intended to do two main things, act as an introduction to the article and to provide a summary of the important asspects of the article. I would suggest that the second paragraph provides quite a good summary of the video section of this article. However, my comment when I read it was "what video" as the first paragraph only talks about the song, and remixing. Alternatively, the second paragraph could perhaps be slightly modified as:

The song was well-received by critics and achieved commercial success worldwide topping the chart in U.S., thus making it Madonna's fifth Billboard Hot 100 number-one single. It was also released as a music video. The video, however, visualised a different concept of the song.....

main review

[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


A comprehensive, easily-readable, wide-ranging article.

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Congratulations on the article, I'm awarding GA-status.Pyrotec (talk) 20:39, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]