Talk:Vanilla Chocolat/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Calvin999 (talk · contribs) 17:04, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

One dead link
Why are there citations in the info box for the recording studios when were are sourced in the Background?
We don't need the city or country for the recording location.
You've used a flat list for writers and producers so apply it to the genres too
"Vanilla Chocolat" is a song → "Vanilla Chocolate" should be in bold but not the quotation marks
dance/pop vocalist → singer
taken from → from
Which number album is this?
vocals from Romanian rapper → You already linked Romanian in previous sentence
December 24, 2014 → Comma after 2014. Does Romania use American date formatting??
by Stan, Ștefan Mihalache, → Stefan is Connect-R, no?
session in Romania and the US. → You can't have one session in two places.
well-received → Should this be hyphenated?
"catchy" rap → Quotes in the lead need a source
number-nine → Shouldn't be hyphenated
on the Zip Dance Airplay[3][4] and at number twenty-five on the Zip Hot 100.[5] → What countries do these belong to?
influenced by Synth-pop and Euro house. → Neither of these are in the info box. Likewise, the ones in the info box don't appear here either.
Discogs is not reliable for genres.
was revealed on December 3, 2015, → Considering today is September 19, 2015... Typo
skin being vanilla-coloured, → She's white anyway?
Background and composition → Has no flow. You go from the recording to the genres to the cover art to the choosing of Connect
POP Shock reviewed Unlocked in late 2015,[12] → Odd to place the citation before the quote
Critical response section is a WP:QUOTEFARM
was on December 1, 2015 on Neatza → Again, today is September 19, 2015
also lipsynched → Link lip-synced

So many issues already, here are a few more that jump out at me.

Credits for "Vanilla Chocolat" adapted from the official video and Discogs[23][26] → Credits from a video? Why not use the album notes?
What does label mean for those people involved?
Release history needs marking up for access.

I'm concerned that most of the sources used are not reliable. Furthermore, all of the genres are not sourced properly or reliably. Common mistakes are using dates in December 2015 when it's three months from now are silly errors, and overall the article feels like you've rush written and rush nominated. Looking at the previous review, the same concerns are present, specifically with sourcing. Sorry but this can't be passed. — Calvin999 11:08, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]