Talk:Excuse Me Mr./GA1

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.

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Aoba47 (talk · contribs) 20:22, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I will pick this up for a review if that is okay with you. Aoba47 (talk) 20:22, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lead and infobox

I would separate the first paragraph’s second sentence into two separate sentences as they are covering two separate ideas (i.e. writing/production credits and the single’s release).
For this sentence ("Excuse Me Mr." has also been featured on their 2003 greatest hits album, The Singles 1992–2003.), I believe that “included” would be a better word choice than “featured”.
I have an issue with this sentence (Other critics discussed the song's speed, which they found to be rather fast-paced.). I only see one critic mention the song’s pace (i.e. The Observer) so I do not believe the “other critics” part is accurate. Also, if only one critic mentions this, it does not appear notable enough for the lead.
For this part (reaching the top 40 of the alternative charts in both the United States and Canada while peaking at number 11 in New Zealand.), I would say “and” instead of “while” to avoid implications that the song appeared on all these charts at the same time.
I would revise this sentence (The music video for "Excuse Me Mr." was directed by Sophie Muller and filmed during January 1997) to the following (Sophie Muller directed the music video for “Excuse Me Mr.” during January 1997) to avoid passive voice.
For this part (It features two different storylines: the first shows No Doubt playing "Excuse Me Mr.”), I think you can substitute the song’s title with “the song” or “the single” to avoid repeating the full title two sentences in a row.
I am uncertain about this part (Musically, "Excuse Me Mr." is a ska and rock-influenced song). I read it as meaning that it is “ska-influenced”. In the body of the article, you say it is a ska song and you include ska in the infobox, but I would clarify this here as it is slightly confusing.

Background and release

I would move the image to the left to avoid potential interruptions with the infobox in certain views.
I would considering changing the first paragraph’s first sentence from passive voice to active voice.
For this part (Kenneth Partridge from The A.V. Club considered this misfortune to be a blessing, because it allowed the), I do not believe that “this misfortune to be a blessing” is necessary. I think you can just say (Kenneth Partridge from The A.V. Club felt it allowed the…) to be more concise.

Composition and lyrics

I am confused by this sentence (Musically, "Excuse Me Mr." is a ska song that recalls No Doubt's previous works.). How does the song recall the band’s previous work? Also, the next sentence says that it references “the music that helped form No Doubt”, which is different than the first sentence. I am confused by this. Do any of the sources clarify these points further?
For this part (then used "Excuse Me Mr." as an example of the one of the many different styles of songs on Tragic Kingdom.), “the” ins not needed.
You do not need the references in the first two sentences of the second paragraph as the entire paragraph is tied to one source.
For this part (The song's message is the opposite of “Spiderweb”’s), I do not think you need the possessive with the song title.
For this part (These lyrics, specifically, were described a “sonically…), I am uncertain if the commas are necessary around “specifically”.

Critical reception

I think you can combine these two parts (Annie Zaleski from the publication admired the track in addition to "Happy Now?" and "Sunday Morning"; she noted that all three of them "have just the right amount of pep”.) to be more concise. One option is (Annie Zaleski, writing for the publication, praised the track, along with "Happy Now?" and "Sunday Morning" as having “just the right amount of pep”.).
For this part (She also found the track to be emotive), I do not believe that “also” is necessary.

Chart performance

I would provided a link for Billboard.
I do not think you need to use the song’s full title in the second sentence.
For this part (but did reach the Top Rock/Alternative Tracks chart), I think you need “it” between “but” and “did”.

Music video

How is the screenshot beneficial to the article? I have always been told to keep non-free media to a minimal. Since the screenshot was not the subject of critical commentary or reviews, I do not believe the screenshot is particularly helpful beyond the prose. I would either expand the rationale for inclusion or remove it.

Live performances

For this part (At the first ever Rock in Rio USA music festival), I do not believe “ever” is needed.

Final comments

Good work on this article. Once my comments are addressed, I will be more than happy to pass this. Aoba47 (talk) 03:27, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Carbrera: Just wanted to check with you on this. Aoba47 (talk) 21:08, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Aoba47 - Thanks for the review. Do you mind if I address these concerns within the next two days? thanks, Carbrera (talk) 19:53, 15 November 2018 (UTC).[reply]

Take as much time as you need. Just let me know when you get to it. I will leave this open as long as you need. Have a great rest of your week! Aoba47 (talk)

Due to Aoba47 suddenly taking leave, I am volunteering to take charge of the nomination. That means I'll pretty much just be keeping an eye on it while you address the issues. May have further comment, but it will likely be little. dannymusiceditor ^oops 05:38, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wait a second, that was only six hours ago he said he'd make sure it was fine? Idk. If Aoba goes MIA for a bit and the issues are sufficiently addressed I'll pass it for him, but I didn't mean to usurp so quickly if he only said this six hours ago. dannymusiceditor ^oops 05:40, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the back and forth. I will be taking an extended leave of absence from Wikipedia, but I will wrap up everything with this review. I feel obligated to carry it out until the end. However, if you see anything else that requires improvement, I would greatly appreciate it. Aoba47 (talk) 03:30, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Aoba47 - Sorry for not getting to this within the past few days. I've been abnormally busy and am currently trying to finish another GA nom. I promise to complete this review this week. I'll be more free after Wednesday. Thanks, Carbrera (talk) 07:51, 19 November 2018 (UTC).[reply]

No worries. Thank you for the update. Good luck with the other GAN. Aoba47 (talk) 07:53, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Carbrera: Any updates? Aoba47 (talk) 08:36, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Verdict

I am going to ✗ Fail this due to lack of activity. Aoba47 (talk) 23:50, 29 November 2018 (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.