Talk:Chillin (Wale song)/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: Calvin999 (talk · contribs) 12:39, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Calvin999 and I am reviewing this article.

Review

Two dead links
Hip hop is included in the info box, but not sourced or cited anywhere in the article.
Link sample
Following its release, → Remove, it's kind of obvious that it's following the release and not before it
with one group of reviewers → This also sounds as though it's one group in one review, whereas I'm sure you mean multiple critics from different publications had similar thoughts
and others criticizing Wale and Gaga's contributions. → Slightly ambiguous
of some of the nations. → You haven't previously mentioned any countries, so this reads a bit strange
twelve at United Kingdom. → twelve on the UK Singles Chart.
Its highest peak was number twelve at United Kingdom. In the United States it peaked at number ninety-nine on the Billboard Hot 100. → This could one sentence with separate clauses, because the second paragraph of the lead doesn't flow due to several successive short sentences
for the single → Not needed
in or near → in and around
"Late Night with Jimmy Fallon" → Late Night with Jimmy Fallon
on July 14, 2009, → Not needed for the lead
and at a number of shows leading up to the album's release date.[1] → Unless you're going to say them there's not much point including this because it doesn't tell the reader anything. Also, a citation shouldn't be here provided this info is included further down
Wale wanted Gaga to collaborate with him on the track since January 2009, because he believed that → Wale had wanted to collaborate with Lady Gaga with him on "Chillin" since January 2009, believing that
He said of the collaboration: → Not needed
The block quote shouldn't have quotation marks because it is already indented
The composition section mentions usage of two samples, but you only mention one in the lead?
The music video for the song was directed by Chris Robinson. The full video was posted on Interscope's YouTube channel on the June 12, 2009. Young Chris, Tre, Pusha T, Anwan Glover and Bun B. all appear in the music video. → This doesn't flow
One of the two massive dogs → Too informal and not encyclopaedic
Critical reception of the song has been mixed. → "Chillin" garnered a mixed response from music critics
Critical reception needs work. For example, Sobhi Youssef from Sputnikmusic noticed the contrast in the composition of "Chillin", making it a completely different track than the rest of the album., doesn't really tell me anything.
the song debuted for one week → A song can only debut once... so this is awkward phrasing
fell off the next week. → Bit informal
The song charted on the Hot 100, so per WP:USCHARTS, the Bubbling Under chart should not be in the table

Summary

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section:

B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Outcome

I'm sorry IndianBio, but this article isn't ready to be passed as a GA yet. It needs a copyedit, phrasing is an issue throughout, the genre isn't sourced, there are dead links. Structure and flow is a problem too. I know this has been nominated since December 2014 and this probably isn't the outcome you had hoped for, but I'm sure you can see from what I've highlighted above that this can't be passed. As before, I suggest a copyedit by someone, perhaps list it at GOCE, and then re-nominate. — Calvin999 12:39, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.