Talk:Trouble (Natalia Kills album)/GA1

GA Review

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.

---

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

Reviewer: WonderBoy1998 (talk · contribs) 14:43, 29 December 2013 (UTC) Hi! I'll be conducting the review for this album. --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 14:43, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

File/Image/Link checks

• Two audio samples which have rationales. However, I suggest adding a more detailed purpose of usage in their rationales and put emphasis on what they convey about the album.

•  Done, I think. Although I can't add anything else to Saturday Night.

• One non free image which has a rationale.
• No dablinks, as per this.
• Some url replacements you have to make, as per this.

•  Partly done since I can't figure out what I'll do to the 301-class links.

Even I encountered some problems with the Amazon sites. As long as they are working, keep them as it is. --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 12:52, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

First-read comments

• At first read, this article has been nicely thought out and is well-written. However, there are some issues I will point out
• Why is only Bhasker listed as the producer in the infobox when it seems there are other producers like Doubet and Haynie involved? Every producer of the album must be listed.

 Done

• If Kills states that the album has "no electro or dance music influences in the album," then why is electro rock listed as a genre in infobox. It seems contradictory.
• As the body doesn't seem to mention electro rock anywhere, it should be removed as a genre from the infobox, or be supported by a reference there.

 Done

• Merge Critical reception and Commercial performance into one section and make them subsections.

 Done

• You can completely remove the Charts section as text is enough to convey as it appeared on only one chart. --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 10:17, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

 Done

Now a more detailed analysis...

Bg and recording

• It seems Kills released "Don't Play Nice" under the name of Verbalicious. How about mentioning that?

 Done

• " but she was dropped from the label." - Doesn't have any source supporting the fact that she was dropped. She had to leave as AATW went bankrupt. So I think you should mention that, using this source.

 Done

• Ref #2 - Natalia Kills". Sputnikmusic. Retrieved 21 December 2013. - Sputnikmusic is not printed media and so should not be italicised. Put it under the publisher parameter.

 Done

• Ref #4- "Day 3 in the studio with...". Twitter. 4 April 2013. Retrieved 28 August 2013. - A tweet is not a reputable source. Same for Ref #5 ("In the studio with @AngelHaze...". Twitter. 17 May 2012. Retrieved 28 August 2013.)

It was posted by Kills, though, and it verifies what's in the infobox and some stuff that's in the section, like producers... I think we should keep them, although it's up to you.

As per some points listed in Wikipedia:TWITTER, I think the tweet can be used here. However, I do recommend that you later check up with some other and more experienced editor. As of now I will not hold this against the GA result. --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 15:52, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

• "He also played the guitar along with Daniell Haim and Jimmy Messer; the keybords with Emile Haynie, who also wrote two songs and served as an additional producer for "Problem", "Boys Don't Cry" and the album's title track; the piano, and the organ." - Split this sentence by removing the part "who also wrote two songs and served as an additional producer for "Problem", "Boys Don't Cry" and the album's title track;" and putting it into a separate sentence. I suggest making this "He also played the guitar along with Daniell Haim and Jimmy Messer; the keybords with Emile Haynie, the piano, and the organ. Haynie also wrote two songs and served as an additional producer for "Problem", "Boys Don't Cry" and the album's title track." You can do something similar if you want.

 Done

Composition

Styles

• "Kills opted for a new sound, notable for its guitar-driven instrumentals against pop, along with "harder" beats" Consider changing this to "Kills opted for a new sound, employing guitar-driven instrumentals against "harder" beats rooted in pop music."

 Done

• Any sentence which contains even the smallest quote should end with a citation, for bureaucratic reasoning. --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 17:55, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
• "as visible in Kills'" - "visible" doesn't seem like proper word choice. Try "apparent" or "present in Kills (don't put "as" in this one)."

 Done

• "into the album and then [kept] bits out [...]"" - I don't see any proper reason to keep this quote incomplete. The other part is just " – it’s not lying, it’s just selective truth-ing, if you know what I mean". You should add that because as of now it looks a little awkward, and it might affect readers' understanding of the quote. --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 04:44, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

 Added

Songs

• "both contain "sinister"" - Removed "both"
• Again, any sentence which contains even the smallest quote should end with a citation.
• "noting that it "skip[s] the hyperbole" of the aforementioned song" - Consider changing this to "noting that it skips the "hyperbole" of the aforementioned song"

 Done

• " The former discusses criminal activity, domestic abuse, drugs and deviance, topics which Bradley Stern from MuuMuse noted was not "radio-friendly"." - The former should be discussed before the latter, hence move this before "The latter was likene..."

 Done

• " buzz single" - Consider changing to "promotional single" as "buzz single" sounds like a more informal term, although frequently used on various websites, and doesn't seem to be appropriate for an encyclopaedia.

 Done

• "sex obsession to cult leaders" - Copied directly from source, however, let "cult readers" remain as it is but change "sex obsession" to "sexual addiction" (whether or not to wikilink is your choice)

 Done

• "Eradicating the previous songs,"- Oh my, this definitely isn't proper word choice. Consider changing to ""Devils Don't Fly", "Marlboro Lights", and "Watching You" deviate from the dark and rock-influenced style of the previous tracks by following a ballad-oriented sound. Do note that "ballad" usually refers to a song's structure, so you should make it clear as to what exactly "ballad-oriented sound" means.

 Done, but I can't figure out what to write about "ballad-oriented sound", so I wrote their genres.

• "The latter is the only song present on the album that was not produced by Jeff Bhasker." - Unlink Jeff Bhasker and make it only Bhasker. Secondly, if he did not produce it, why is he listed as one of the producers of the song ("Watching You") in the track listing section?

I guess I'm wrong then...  Removed

• "is more produced" Consider changing to "is heavier production-wise"

 Removed since it's not really necessary.

• "The eighth track "Outta Time" is a "pastiche of sounds" from other eras [...] [14]" - I think the source cited does not support this as Idolator doesn't seem to mention "pastiche of sounds" and only mentions "Outta Time" as a "perfectly solid throwback ’60s girl-group swag"

Replaced.

• " For example, when Kills sings "Let them take it all the way / The sweet Rozay, the Cartier / Stop the warden, call your name / I’d give you all my freedom, babe", she says that she'd trade all of the objects and possessions their family had to have her father back with them. Due to that, Kills decided to include pictures of bottles of champagne and Rolex watches in the album artwork." - This part can be good for the Artwork section, as an explanation behind the symbolism of the champagne and Rolex. You can move it from here, and instead explore how "Daddy's Girl" samples "Rich Girl (Hall & Oates song)". --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 04:44, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

I can't find anything else about that sample... I just wrote that it samples the song.

Release and artwork

• "The official release of Trouble first occurred on 2 September 2013 in Spain[20] and Italy,[21] as a digital download." - The Amazon sources for both the countries mention the release date as 9 Sept. 2013. --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 05:15, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Changed.

• "The day after, it was released in the United States, and on 10 and 17 September 2013 - respectively - a physical format, as a Compact Disc was sent out to stores in the United States and in Canada" - Only the Canadian Amazon site is cited, hence only 17 Sept. is sourced. What about the US release?

 Added source.

• You can wikilink Getty Images

 Done

Promotion

• "first buzz single" - Consider changing buzz single as mentioned above.

 Done

• "It has attracted more than 70,000 views since its release." - Unnecessary part. You should remove this.

 Done

• "else's suffering."." Remove the second period.

 Done

• Where is the link to the iTunes citation?

 Added

• "portraied" → "portrayed"
• ""teas[ing]" the police, "mak[ing] out"" - In a quote, the words outside of the square brackets should also make sense and be grammatically correct (until they have been printed that way). Here, "teas" and "mak" are not real words, hence you will have to reword this,

 Done

• "onto YouTube.[33][34]" - Remove ref [34] (The YouTube one)

 Removed

• The coverage of this section is good.

Thank you.

Reception

Critical

• Sort the reviews in alphabetical order. Also, positive reviews should be first in line, and then with negative ones.

 Done

• This section definitely needs every sentence containing a quote followed by a citation.

 Added inline citations.

• "Despite of that, Johnson was divided relatively to the ballad-oriented songs on the album," - Consider changing to "However, the critic was not positive towards the ballad-oriented songs on the album, th..."

 Done

• " He stated: "There are certain artists in this world that are as talented if not more talented than some of the biggest selling household names in music - we each have our favourites and a list that we could reel off on demand. The reasons that they might not have achieved that level of global domination is always subjective, but is by no means in part to an inferior product. Contributing factors might be simple miscommunication and other marketing failures, whether it is through their own admission, an immense lack of mainstream press support because the artist wasn't willing to succumb to ludicrous PR stunts, instead choosing to remain true to their art, or finally because they were a victim of career/radio-play sabotage [...]. Which leads me to question, is this now the only way to sell records and garner mass appeal? Is humanity and consumerism that fickle? Does tabloid press dictate genuine artistry? Does one need to take such drastic measures in fear that their product might not live up to that of another? [...] Trouble deserves this visibility and radio play, so if you believe in it and in her, share it, tell friends about it, call into radio stations to request it and most of all, buy it to give her this moment and the opportunity to share more with you."" - EXCESSIVELY long quote, and remember that the words published by Huffington Post are also copyrighted material and should be used in a minimum manner. Paraphrase some points that are very apparent in the quote and include only essential quoted words. --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 14:08, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

 Removed a lot of content. prism △ 14:48, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Commercial

• " 6000 copies sold (almost half of the singer's previous album opening week sales)." Remove the brackets and join the sentences using, perhaps, a dash.

 Done Overall this article is a good-read. Its coverage is excellent. I think these changes can help improve it greatly. I definitely suggest putting it up for peer review later on and then nominating for FA class. --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 14:08, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you so much! prism △ 14:51, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Ref styles

• Ref 20 - ^ "Trouble [Explicit]: Natalia Kills: Amazon.es: Tienda MP3". Amazon.es. 1 January 1970. Retrieved 7 September 2013. - Published on "1 January 1970?" Is that even possible? For sites like Amazon publication date needn't be provided. Same for all Amazon citations that mention 1 Jan 1970.

 Done

• I think publisher of YouTube should be listed as Google. However, since I have suggested removing all YouTube sources above (they're not even needed), I think you won't need to do anything.

 Removed all.

• Ref 32 - ^ "iTunes – Music – Outta Time – Single by Natalia Kills". Itunes.apple.com. 3 September 2013. Retrieved 7 September 2013. - Not consistent with previous iTunes citation, which listed the publisher as "iTunes Store. Apple Inc." Same for ref 53.

 Done

• Check all citations for repeat link. Problems I can point out include the AllMusic reference (42).

 Done

• Ref 44 - "^ Thakkar, Nik (15 September 2013). "An Open Letter In Support Of Natalia Kills' Trouble". Huffington Post. AOL. Retrieved 23 December 2013." - Wikilink Huffington Post, which is a printed medium (So should be in the work parameter)

It's a website...

• Keep date formats consistent. Most of the citations follow the DDMMYY style written out in words, like 12 March 2013, but a few (mostly the Amazon ones) follow "2013-09-07." --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 14:19, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

 Done

Lead and infobox

So sorry, but I forgot to review the lead and infobox!

• Again, include citations after every quoted sentence.

 Not done: from a review I saw with an experienced editor, either everything is sourced on the lead or nothing is.

Here are a few FA/GA articles that source in lead. Kylie Minogue Rich Girl (Gwen Stefani song) Heat (perfume) Saga (comic book)

I included a citation next to "high impact pop" prism △ 16:42, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Exactly what it needed --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 16:54, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

• "buzz single" - "promotional single"

 Done

• Rest is good. --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 15:28, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Article is Passing until issues are addressed Good Work! --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 16:54, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! Like prism △ 16:58, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome. By the way, consider commenting at Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/She Wolf/archive1. Thank you --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 17:01, 2 January 2014 (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.