Talk:Thank You for the Heartbreak/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: Hahc21 (talk · contribs) 05:02, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Round 1

Ok, ladies and gentlemen, let's do this. I'll be reviewing the article for the next 7 days. So, by next friday, i'll give my verdict.

First scan:

• The article is in good shape.
  • It is well-structured.
  • Seems to have good prose
  • Seems to be well referenced
  • Images are put if necessary.

--Hahc21 (talk) 03:23, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Second scan:

• Some sentences need to be rewritten to avoid confusion:
  1. "The song was recorded during Sugababes' travel to the United States to work on the album; they subsequently signed a contract to Jay-Z's label Roc Nation which gave them access to the high-profile personnel."

--Hahc21 (talk) 03:23, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done. Till I Go Home (talk) 05:52, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Third scan:
So the article is pretty short. Well, it's not a single but simply a song on an album, so it's long enough to cover all information found. I've read it three times by now and i think i've fixed all minor issues. I'll be checking in the references to verify that nothing is unreferenced and/or original research. --Hahc21 (talk) 03:23, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

• Reference No.7 is temporarily unavailable. There's some additional link?--Hahc21 (talk) 03:23, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
  • I've fixed it with the Wayback Machine.--Hahc21 (talk) 03:23, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Fourth scan:
Ok, maybe i separated to much paragraphs. My bad. =) Everything seems ok. I'll be checking refs and that stuff by saturday May 5.--Hahc21 (talk) 07:14, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Till I Go Home (talk) 07:38, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Round 2

Reference scan #1: Issues or commentary

• Reference #6
  • Commentary: The reference does not explicitly say "which refers to forgetting about the pains of that relationship by dancing in the club". Notwithstanding, i don't believe it could be considered an original research.--Hahc21 (talk) 02:00, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Ok, references checked. Only this issue I found. --Hahc21 (talk) 02:00, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done. Removed. Till I Go Home (talk) 03:39, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Syntax and Semantic scan #1: Issues only

1. "Craig Herman of Stuck Records wrote that the song's "pulsing intro" is reminiscent of a track from All I Ever Wanted (2009), the fourth studio album released by American recording artist Kelly Clarkson. According to Herman, this "does nothing to dispel the notion that he rather shamelessly recycles his material"."

• The issue: The reference clarifies that the song on Clarkson's album was written by Tedder, but the text on the article does not clarify this. It is actually open for confusion. So, it needs to be rewritten to add such information. --Hahc21 (talk) 02:00, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Ok, syntax and semantics checked. Everything os ok with the exception above. I think this review will be finished before the time i originally planned. --Hahc21 (talk) 02:00, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done. Added "written by Tedder". Till I Go Home (talk) 03:35, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Round 3

Reference scan #2: Issues or commentary

• References #4 and #13

• Commentary: There is no issue, but i've noted the reference #4 (Discogs), that is supporting the statement "that has a length of three minutes and forty seconds.", actually says the song lasts for three min. and forty-one seconds. Although, the reference #13 (iTunes) does says the song lasts for three min. and forty seconds. So i was thinking that, considering that what reference #4 covers is also actually on reference #13, getting rid of #4 and instead use #13 on that statement. Or, on the statement, we can also add the reference #13 and have both references in there....

 Done> The Discogs ref. is actually to support the "electropop". Till I Go Home (talk) 03:19, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Mmm, ok. Thanks for clarifying that. =) --Hahc21 (talk) 03:38, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Round 4

Ok, i've checked the article one more time to see if i missed something. As of now, i believe it is ready to the final process: evaluation against the GA criteria. I'll be doing the first verdict round by Tuesday May 8, 2012.--Hahc21 (talk) 04:58, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Final Verdict

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose):
   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references):
   b (citations to reliable sources):
   c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects):
   b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Additional comments:

1. The article is very well-written and have a easy-to-read prose style. It meets all the MoS guidelines. The're no issue with any of its sections and information is properly ordenated. it is factually accurate and verifiable, it's clean from original research and the sources are reliable (only one exeption).
   
2. The article covers all aspects about the topic, in a focused way, and witha neutral point of view. it is clean of biased statements and presents the topic with clarity. Only one image illustrates the article, but it's enough due to the length of the article. It also contains a music sample of the song.

• Further reading on the Wikipedia guidelines, i found information regarding Discogs. It is not considered to be a reliable source, and the guide encourages to avoid it. So it needs to be replaced. More info:Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Album article style guide. Of course, it is not an issue on the matter, and can be changed later.
• I would like to thank Till I Go Home (talk · contribs) for all his collaborations and good disposal during the review process

Thank you very much :D I have removed the source from Discogs per WP:RSN. Till I Go Home (talk) 05:33, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

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.