Talk:Crazy Beat/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Igordebraga (talk · contribs) 16:32, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article is very well-written and referenced, and so far I only found three objections:

"In the United Kingdom, "Crazy Beat" peaked at number 18 on the UK Singles Chart, but attained lower positions worldwide." - 'In the UK' followed by 'on the UK' seems kind of redundant, maybe cut the first. And if you change, 'while attaining' could be a good replacement.
The penultimate line of Composition seems to not add much aside from a gratuitous mention of the lyrics. Context from how it's quoted in the reference could help.
The second paragraph in Critical reception does not start well: "have aged badly" should be "ha[s] aged badly" given we're dealing with only one song and thus the quote should be slightly corrected; the first word in "but sounded like a novelty hit" is a poor choice given the article does not say 'novelty hit' as a compliment, "and sounded..." should convey that; finally, it's a retrospective review, when all the previous ones were contemporary, fits better lumped with the last reviews of the third paragraph which are also mostly later assessments.

Fix them and you're good to pass. igordebraga ≠ 16:32, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thanks for the review! Alex ^{reach me!} 15:34, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Then you're good to pass, congratulations. igordebraga ≠ 17:50, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]