Talk:Sentimiento (album)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: David Fuchs (talk · contribs) 01:03, 12 December 2013 (UTC) In progress. I should have a complete review up by this weekend; if I don't ping me! Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 01:03, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Since I'm taking a while, might as well give you my thoughts piecemeal.

• Let's talk about images:
  • I'm not sure you have a good rationale for using all the non-free content you've got per WP:NFCC. File:Sentimiento Ivy.jpg has a rationale as primary identification of the album, but that doesn't hold for File:Sentimiento, Platinum Edition - Ivy Queen.jpg. You have a great number of non-free music samples, but I don't think they have enough of a defensible rationale behind them. If you were going to keep some of them, I'd try and focus on any that have specific critical commentary about the elements highlighted in the track cut.
• Prose
  • One, you really shouldn't use contractions at all if they are outside of direct quotes. (MOS:N'T)
  • Secondly, related to the above, I find that the article's entire tone is a bit too casual. This is an issue partly because it makes it hard to figure out where quotes are coming from (example: On the album, Queen added "strings, piano, acoustic ballads and romantic tunes" to prove that reggaetón isn't just the basic dembow beat. She said she wanted to give a 180-degree turn to what people think of reggaetón". She explained "Many think reggaetón is just nice rhythms to dance to. And they forget there are song-writers and composers, who, like everyone else, also suffer and aspire in love". She wanted the album to be about that. … who said "strings, piano, acoustic ballads and romantic tunes"?) The other issue is that I feel some of the content comes near to close paraphrasing, which you should really really avoid. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 15:38, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
• Coverage
  • There seems to be enough coverage of the albums development, release, and reception to meet GA criteria. Article is well-structured to standards. No issues here.
• References
  • I'm not entirely sold on using Pandora as a source for the musical components for individual songs. Is it possible to replace these with something that's not a straight database with no clear authorship?
  • I'm not familiar with the following works and thus not sure about their reliability: Caracol, Dealante, Wapa.tv. I know that About.com is frowned upon in some circles, I know, so it might be worth seeing if there are better sources for those links.

I'm afraid that the nominator hasn't been active at all in more than a month, so it might be time to close the review. The article has been on hold for three weeks, and the list of albums waiting to be reviewed is overbooked.--Вик Ретлхед (talk) 21:18, 17 January 2014 (UTC)