Talk:Live While We're Young

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleLive While We're Young has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 30, 2013Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on September 26, 2012.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the official video for One Direction's "Live While We're Young" was premiered four days early following a leak of it online?

Page creation[edit]

I think this can warrant an article as its already the fastest selling preorder of all time globally, [1], [2], AdabowtheSecond (talk)

Source[edit]

How should I give a source for a song I bought and listen too? -.- -- $pongeP@ppy (talk) 18:23, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because you need A source as per WP:NOR, period standard rule on Wikipedia. AdabowtheSecond (talk) 11:45, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You don't understand. How should I give a source if I bought a song? -- $pongeP@ppy (talk) 14:23, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
everything needs to be sourced that you have the song doesn't make it reliable AdabowtheSecond (talk) 16:33, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Why? Do you think I'm lying or something? Why would I pick the specific number 2:48 as run time? I could have easily peaked 3:54 or 4:11 as the run time for the song. -- $pongeP@ppy (talk) 18:21, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't even know you just following standard guidelines everything needs to be sourced no WP:NOR is permitted. AdabowtheSecond (talk) 01:42, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Glee[edit]

This is the third time TheTruthiness has added the claim that in the Glee cover of the song, the backgrounds sung by the Dalton Academy Warblers were voiced by the Tufts Beelzebubs. This time, a citation is brought in from 2011 as "proof"—a bare ref in an article currently being reviewed for Good Article status, and a sure way to sink said review if not fixed—back when the Bubs were in fact voicing the Warblers. The problem is that this was only the practice for the second season of Glee. The information is old and obsolete.

For the third season, the Warbler numbers were not recorded by the Bubs—the Bubs have said so themselves—and if TheTruthiness has any reliable source that says the Bubs have returned for the current, fourth season of Glee, I'd love to know about it; it would be useful for the relevant Glee episode articles. But unless he can supply it, I'm going to request that he stop trying to make an unsupported and unlikely claim in this article. I'd also be more impressed if he had attempted to follow WP:LEAD, a requirement for Good Articles and aspiring ones—"Apart from trivial basic facts, significant information should not appear in the lead if it is not covered in the remainder of the article."—and find a place in the article to put the Glee rendition. Featuring the Glee cover in the lead strikes me as WP:UNDUE: it was not released as a single and did not chart on the Hot 100.

I'd be interested to hear what other authors working on this article think about this. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:07, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I concur with everything you wrote and have reverted the user. — Robin (talk) 00:37, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Those issues looked fixed (didn't mention Bubs, wasn't in lead) and you reverted, stop making false statements. --66.203.207.66 (talk) 20:45, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You misinterpreted my action; nevertheless lead, bubs the cover version still needs to be sourced per WP:NOR. — Robin (talk) 20:54, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Again User:TheTruthiness, bare urls cannot be used as this article is a current GAN. Please show me where the article is missing sources. The Fox Flash source (the only appropriate full citation you gave) does not say anything about a cover version of the song. — Robin (talk) 22:28, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Live While We're Young/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: IndianBio (talk · contribs) 08:54, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Starting the review of this song. Nominators please answer queries vigilantly. —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 08:54, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Its been 6 days now. When are you going to begin? — Robin (talk) 20:52, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, got held up in some other issues, will start now. —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 03:25, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for beginning. — Robin (talk) 15:54, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Infobox
  • Looks fine, but you can add the recording location if you have the album liner notes. That would be better.
I don't have the album :/. — Robin (talk) 16:56, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a simple solution. Do you know of any OD fan sites? They usually have the booklets scanned in their galleries. You can add the information from the images. —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 16:06, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I searched for 20 minutes and I wasn't successful. — Robin (talk) 23:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The music video is already added as part of the External links, remove it from infobox since its not used anywhere in the article.
Done — Robin (talk) 16:56, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Producer names in infobox, why suddenly only the surnames? They should have the fullnames I believe. This is not a sentence case.
Done — Robin (talk) 16:56, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Lead
  • While it faced criticism for its opening guitar riff bearing similarities with The Clash's 1982 single "Should I Stay or Should I Go", --> While it faced criticism for its opening guitar riff bearing similarities with The Clash's 1982 single, "Should I Stay or Should I Go", (missing comma)
Done — Robin (talk) 16:56, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • critics who favoured the song --> reviewers who favoured the song
Done — Robin (talk) 16:56, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "resemblance of happiness" --> the context is not clear as to what it is supposed to mean.
That the song resembles happiness. — Robin (talk) 16:56, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If so then why not write it in simple English like "reviewers who favoured the song, completed the omnipresence and the happiness in it." —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 16:06, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done — Robin (talk) 23:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Additionally, the song's lyrics were negatively received by several critics, interpreted as a thinly veiled euphemism for sexual intercourse --> Additionally, the song's lyrics faced negative reception since it was interpreted as a thinly veiled euphemism for sexual intercourse
  • Directed by Vaughan Arnell, it depicts a camping, water festival theme --> Directed by Vaughan Arnell, it has a camping, water festival theme
Done — Robin (talk) 16:56, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Background
  • In early 2012, the group confirmed a follow-up album for their debut album --> In early 2012, the group confirmed a follow-up release to their debut
Done — Robin (talk) 16:56, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The vocal ensemble began recording the album --> vocal ensemble means many things, simple state "The band"
Done — Robin (talk) 16:56, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • IS there any reference regarding the radio release? I don't see any
Done, added ref. — Robin (talk) 16:56, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Might be reference 12 suffices it, you need to clarify.
Composition
  • You have cited Musicnotes.com, why not add the chord progressio also? It's easily viewable there.
I don't know how to format that.. — Robin (talk) 16:56, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Add this line with the sheet music reference. "The song follows a basic sequence of D–G–D–G–D–A as its chord progression". —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 16:06, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done — Robin (talk) 23:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think the quote from Alexis Petridis needs rephrasing to layman's terms. It's too "in-universe" for a common reader to understand.
Do you have suggestions on how it should be sentenced. — Robin (talk) 16:56, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Try this. "According to Alexis Petridis of The Guardian, the guitar is played thrice between the riff with the plectrum stroking the strings, while it is pressed. One note in the chord is changed, which Petridis surmised was probably to avoid paying any royalty to Clash". —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 16:06, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done, thanks! — Robin (talk) 23:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • In contrast of One Direction's --> In contrast to One Direction's
Done — Robin (talk) 16:56, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The song contains a quiet chorus reprise in the bridge.[20] The chorus of the song samples layers of "whoa-oa-oa"[17] and encompasses the lines --> There is something fundamentally wrong in the lines. How is a re-utterance of who-oa-oa a sample? Also the fact about the chorus reprise, does not sound right in this context. Consider rephrasing the whole block.
Changed 'samples' to incorporates. Chorus reprise: I don't interpret anything wrong, could you please elaborate? — Robin (talk) 16:56, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The idea being that you and me, lovers of music, would understand it. Not someone who has any clue about chords and stuff. So try rephrasing it like "The chorus of the song is also predominantly featured along side the bridge, and is backed by vocal chanting the words "whoa-oa-oa". —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 16:06, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done — Robin (talk) 23:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done — Robin (talk) 16:56, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's all for now. Do these changes as I will continue adding comments. —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 05:49, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Critical response
  • received a mixed reception --> remove a
Done — Robin (talk) 23:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "what we've heard before - but when you're the" --> En-dash please
Done — Robin (talk) 23:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Like all of One Direction's music, “Live While We’re Young” is relentlessly effective, an --> When the song name is mentioned as part of or inside a quote from someone, it will be withing single quotes like "... all of One Direction's music, 'Live While We’re Young' is relentlessly effective, an..." There are lotsda instances like this. Please check thoroughly.
Better? — Robin (talk) 23:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Popdust is not a magazine so no italics. Same for PopCrush, check these stuff throughout.
Fixes — Robin (talk) 23:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • My concern with this section is that as I gradually progress, it is starting to resemble kinda like a WP:QUOTEFARM. I would strongly suggest changing at least 30% of quotes to prose.
I have trimmed a bit. — Robin (talk) 23:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • About.com is an unreliable source for featured content and is challenged.
Really? The same exact reviewer is featured on FA Irreplaceable for example. Anyway, that source is only being used in the critical reception section. — Robin (talk) 23:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Commercial
  • Why "number one" and then "number 3"? Maintain consistency
Fixed — Robin (talk) 23:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The certifications by IFPI are for shipment, not sales
Fixed — Robin (talk) 23:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The single debuted at number two on the Australian Singles Chart of 14 October 2012 --> The single debuted at number two on the Australian Singles Chart dated 14 October 2012
Done — Robin (talk) 23:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • 341,000 copies in its first week.[61][60] --> In these cases, ref 60 should be before 61. Rearrange them.
Done — Robin (talk) 23:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • the third biggest debut ever for a download by a group, surpassed by the arrivals --> the third biggest debut ever for digital download by a group, surpassed by the arriva
  • comma after Payphone's sales
Done — Robin (talk) 23:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

More to come. —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 16:06, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It has been 9 days since you have posted anything; can you continue? — Robin (talk) 21:00, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Music Video
  • ..Starting. —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 02:46, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "secret place." --> "secret place".
  • Those Twitter.com sources need to go. I know they are official verified accounts, but social media websites are not acceptable in featured content which is what you are trying to achieve here. Try finding third party sources if they have reported these statements.
  • According to an MTV News --> According to a MTV News
  • However, a poor quality version of the music video leaked online on 20 September 2012.[71] The same day it was officially published on One Direction's Vevo channel on YouTube because of the leak --> Combine them, same idea and same flow.
  • Released on 12 October 2012, Bieber regained the record with his music video for "Beauty and a Beat" (10.6 million) ---> Bieber regained the record with the release of music video for "Beauty and a Beat" (10.6 million) on 12 September 2012.
Live performance
  • to a record crowd estimated at 15,000 ---> to a record crowd of 15,000
  • Can we have some description of the performances at least? It becomes pretty diffficult to read in this section cause its only a list of the locations of the performances>
    • The references don't specify such information. — Robin (talk) 19:57, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Can you search some? Cause the paragraph reads pretty bland and list like, with a jotting of the performance venues. Or if you can rephrase the same.
        • The thing is One Direction's performances never include elaborate dance routines or special effects. They just jump/walk around, so there isn't much to describe. — Robin (talk) 19:02, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Glee version did not chart anywhere?
    • It wasn't released as a single and didn't chart. — Robin (talk) 19:57, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Formats
  • Bold the tracklist headings and correct en-dash

Which one is that? — Robin (talk) 19:57, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Credits
  • No need to have em-dash in between the names and the roles, have en-dash.
  • Liner notes reference needs the page no., publisher, catalogue id etc etc. Just the album name won't do.
    • Fixed; I fixed the credits citation for good now. — Robin (talk) 12:36, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • It was not fixed, I corrected the dashes. Take a look at where all you should replace the dashes, so that you can do it in the references. —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 05:20, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • I cannot imagine that en-dash is required in the GA criteria. At this time, I'm not planning to enhance this to FA so it doesn't have to be perfect.— Robin (talk) 12:36, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • Yes it is, en-dash is a requirement even in normal articles and is one of the basic MoS for connecting sentences and prose. And you have a better chance of correcting these at GA level rather than take it to FA level and then facing an oppose over this, because believe me, people oppose over MoS.


References
  • Major coup being all the normal connecting dashes should be en-dashes. Correct this throughout.
    • Easiest way is there to copy the whole article to MS Word, and do a Ctrl+H for replace. —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 14:03, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Where can I find this tool? :/ — Robin (talk) 14:24, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • I thought you meant some manual script tool, but after reading it again I realised you meant Microsoft Word. I tried wasn't succesfull :/. — Robin (talk) 19:02, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Accessdate missing for some.— Robin (talk) 12:36, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Its simply Billboard, not Billboard.biz which is the business website.
  • Remove any content related to About.com. It is not acceptable as a reliable source per WP:RSN.
    • Its only used in the critical reception section, where its perfectly acceptable. I have read tons of good articles in which Bill Lamb of About.com is featured.
      • More reason for it to be removed. Bill Lamb's credibility has been seriously discussed and no authentic fool-proof professionalism of his endevaors have been found. I don't think any recent FA quality articles would have About.com. The website specializes in user written/suibmitted content and hence undermines its academic credo.
  • Reference 55, Switzerland?
    • Hung Medien is stationed in Switzerland
      • If that is the case then why is it not present in the other Hung Medien links?
        • Because those are generic templates
  • Reference 57, 58, does not have url — Robin (talk) 19:02, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 72, Sugarscape.com, what is its reliability and notability?
  • Ref 92, missing work
    • Because its a generic template. — Robin (talk) 12:36, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually the references need a lot of work per me.
    • Actually, I don't detect any problems as this is GA and not FA. — Robin (talk) 12:36, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Not a reason to not correct faulty formatted references wherever we can.
  • Ref 19, PopCrush reference title, no caps please.
  • Ref 53,55 same type of url, but different formatting of work, publishers
    • Using Hung Medien for NZ peak position now.
  • Ref 60, Yahoo! is an online publication and shouldn't be italicized.
  • Ref 67, if you are using the official music video url in the article, then it cannot be in the External links section.
    • Removed from music video section. — Robin (talk) 14:57, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 85, no work publisher parameter.
  • If you are using the {{singlechart}}, why not use them throughout for regions they can be used? I know for Japan and all its not possible, but New Zealand and all why not use the template?
    • Transitioned to what you suggested. — Robin (talk) 14:57, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • And there are still Billboard.biz in the work parameter.
  • Ref 38, Facebook.com? Really?
    • That's the official Facebook page of Sony Music Italy. They release the regional statistics weekly, so its acceptably in my opinion. I have changed it to the single chart template. — Robin (talk) 14:57, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Actually its not for featured content.

I have completed the review. Once all these is done, the article can pass. —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 13:12, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I replaced the dashes and over all I'm satisfied with the article now. Passing it as GA. Congrats! —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 06:13, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for a thorough review and passing it! — Robin (talk) 19:45, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Live While We're Young. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:04, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Live While We're Young. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:51, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Live_While_We%27re_Young&oldid=1208530722"