Jump to content

Talk:Taylor Swift masters dispute/GA1

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

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: GhostRiver (talk · contribs) 17:52, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Hello! I'll be reviewing this article to help reduce the good article nomination backlog and to gain points in the WP:WIKICUP. Although quid pro quo is not required, if you fancy returning the favor, I have a list of articles in need of review here. — GhostRiver 17:52, 15 March 2022 (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

Lede[edit]

Background[edit]

Copyright law[edit]

  • Rather than defining the terms "master" and "publishing rights" later in the para, I'd start with one that protects the specific sound recording, known as the master, and the other protecting the publishing rights of the musical work. Then those two terms can be discussed in greater detail later
I cannot understand. Do you think the paragraph should start with "One that protects..."? Thank you. ℛonherry☘ 10:59, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've made the prose edit myself, although please look it over to see if the reference needs to be moved. — GhostRiver 18:12, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Context[edit]

  • Diacritic needed over the "e" in Bluebird Café
  • I think Borchetta approached Swift and discussed terms can be eliminated entirely, as it's assumed that's how they got from point A (being noticed) to point B (the signing)
  • The sentence beginning Although Big Machine owned the masters is quite long and can probably be split after "had released under Big Machine", with the next sentence starting, "This would allow her to re-record ..."
  • "if she wanted to" → "if desired"
  • "is nearing" → "was nearing"
  • "after when" → "after which"
  • "80%" → "80 percent" per MOS:PERCENT
  • "fully own the albums the label will distribute" → "fully own the albums distributed by the label"
 Done all. ℛonherry☘ 10:59, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute[edit]

Braun's acquisition[edit]

  • "In 2019, Braun acquired Big Machine Records by purchasing it for an estimated $330 million, via his holding company—Ithaca Holdings" → "In 2019, Braun's holding company, Ithaca Holdings, acquired Big Machine Records through a purchase estimated at $330 million."
 Done. ℛonherry☘ 11:02, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Swift's response[edit]

  • Specify what Big Machine's announcement was (presumably that they had been purchased by Braun)
  • I would end the sentence at the quote about "someone who tried to dismantle it" and then begin the next one by explaining the crux of her dislike of Braun, that being his involvement with the Kanye video
  • "get together and bully her online" → "collude to bully her online"
  • "to Braun, whom Borchetta had known for "bullying" Swift" → "to Braun despite being aware of his role in "bullying" Swift."
  • Passman doesn't need to be introduced as "Swift's attorney" here, as he was introduced that way in the background section
  • ""an opportunity to purchase her masters, or the label, outright with a check in the way he is now apparently doing for others."" → ""an opportunity to purchase her masters, or the label, outright with a check in the way he is now apparently doing for others"." per MOS:LQ
 Done all. ℛonherry☘ 11:09, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Borchetta's reply[edit]

  • "Swift's father, Scott Swift," → "Swift's father Scott"
  • "4%" → "four percent" per MOS:NUMERAL and MOS:PERCENT
  • Phrases like "has not been verified" that are set in the present tense should include a date qualifier, e.g. "as of July 2019", when the post about it was made
 Done all three. ℛonherry☘ 11:12, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Further discord[edit]

  • "of blocking" → "of preventing"
  • After introducing "American Music Awards of 2019", you can add "(AMAs)" and then just use the acronym throughout
  • Comma after "rejected Swift's claim and stated"
  • Link Netflix in the quote from Paine
  • Some dates throughout this section would be nice to signpost to readers some kind of timeline; particularly for the AMAs and Braun's statements about death threats
  • ""just another case of shameless greed in the time of Coronavirus."" → ""just another case of shameless greed in the time of Coronavirus"." per MOS:LQ
 Done all of the above. ℛonherry☘ 11:26, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • earned only 33 units Should this read "sold" instead of "earned"?
No. "Sold" is used to represent pure sales. "Earned" or "generated" is used when the tally combines both sales and streams, as streams are not sales, but are a factor in the calculation of an album/song's "units" on charts. ℛonherry☘ 11:26, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aftermath[edit]

  • First sentence reads confusingly. Suggest something like: Swift's solution to the controversy surrounding her masters was to create new recordings of all of the musical work in her first six albums, using the publishing rights she retained, and to have the finished product sound as close to the original as possible.
  • "Hence" can be removed from the second sentence

Re-sale to Shamrock[edit]

  • Non-disclosure agreement was referenced earlier, so you can just use NDA here

Swift's re-recordings[edit]

  • "to tell them apart from" → "to distinguish them from"
  • "music critics" should be piped to Music journalism
  • "19%" → "19 percent" per MOS:PERCENT
  • "itself" can be removed from "In its first four hours of availability itself"
 Done with the above seven points. ℛonherry☘ 12:02, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Press investigation[edit]

  • ""some insiders speculate the value [of Swift's masters] could be as high as $450 million once certain earn-backs are factored in."" → ""some insiders speculate the value [of Swift's masters] could be as high as $450 million once certain earn-backs are factored in"." per MOS:LQ
  • "and that himself" → "and that he"
  • ""unhappy to be dragged into the dispute in such a public way."" → ""unhappy to be dragged into the dispute in such a public way"." per MOS:LQ
  • Did any publications respond to the Business Insider exclusive?
I don't think so. ℛonherry☘ 04:51, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Page Six should be italicized as the name of a publication
 Done all. ℛonherry☘ 04:51, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Responses[edit]

  • ""lined up for Team Swift or Team Braun, creating the most public battle about an artists' masters in recent memory."" → ""lined up for Team Swift or Team Braun, creating the most public battle about an artists' masters in recent memory"." per MOS:LQ

Entertainment industry[edit]

  • "who agreed with Swift's reason"
  • I would remove Kelly Clarkson from the initial long list of musicians since she gets her own sentence about her support later
  • "man of good character" hews close to POV, is there a direct quote that can be used instead?
  • The link around "you graciously let me open up for you" reads a bit MOS:EASTEREGG
  • an Instagram post for his 2016 FaceTime selfie confusing syntax, isn't immediately clear who he's FaceTimeing in the picture
  • ""only time will tell who made the wise decision."" → ""only time will tell who made the wise decision"." per MOS:LQ

Politicians[edit]

  • I'd make it clearer that a large part of Warren's presidential platform was her dislike of private equity firms, hence why she phrased her statement as she did
  • I'd switch the order of sentences so we know that Youngkin is involved with the Carlyle Group before we're told that his opponent connected him to the controversy

Contemporary critics[edit]

  • "in the 2010s decade"
  • Missing space in "ofThe Guardian"

Scholars[edit]

  • "and law firms have published"
  • In "University of California's Los Angeles School of Law", please use the more precise link UCLA School of Law
 Done with everything in Responses. ℛonherry☘ 05:12, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Impact and legacy[edit]

  • Overall, I've been taking time to look at this section out of some WP:PROSELINE concerns. I'll try to go more in detail here.
  • I think the first sentence belongs in the "Responses" section, as it's really about the immediate response rather than the impact
  • I have redone the second paragraph rather than confusingly trying to explain how to fix it. That being said, two more comments:
    • There's a little bit of a WP:REFBOMB happening at the end of the paragraph; I'd rather have each sentence tied to a ref than have four at the end.
    • Please be more specific about the licensing issues that would arise
  • Please be more specific about why those three songs were considered to reference the dispute
  • Combine the paragraphs on Swift's fans making the older recordings "disappear" with the one about iHeartRadio, as both are thematically similar
  • "to re-record the Jonas Brothers' back catalog"
  • I would move the paragraph about it being "a topic of academic study" to the section on "Scholarship", as those are also thematically similar
  • Those should be all my main comments on this section

References[edit]

  • All footnotes should have a reference attached
 Done all of the above. ℛonherry☘ 20:02, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

General comments[edit]

Thank you for your patience, and for working on such a long article! Finally putting on hold. Please feel free to reach out with questions, and let me know when you're finished. — GhostRiver 18:12, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Finished implementing all of your suggestions and addressed all of your concerns! Thank you for reviewing this article. I learnt a lot from the corrections you listed, which will be very helpful in my edits moving forward and would certainly aid me in writing better articles that will quickly pass GA. Thanks once again. ℛonherry☘ 20:06, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ronherry Wow, I completely forgot to look at the lede. I'm so sorry. Just a few more points:

  • "reported that American media proprietor Scooter Braun had purchased Big Machine"
  • "$330,000,000" → "$330 million" per MOS:MILLION
  • Direct quotes in the lede have to be cited (in this case, "incessant, manipulative bully")
  • "including her allegations of the label blocking her" → "and Swift alleged that the label had blocked her"
  • "$300,000,000" → "$300 million" per MOS:MILLION
  • "she will re-record" → "she would re-record"
  • "One of their tracks" → "One re-recorded track"

Once again, thank you for your patience! — GhostRiver 19:42, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GhostRiver:  Done all. ℛonherry☘ 03:32, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for making those changes, and for your patience! Happy to pass. :) — GhostRiver 19:48, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Taylor_Swift_masters_dispute/GA1&oldid=1176492080"