Talk:No Body, No Crime

No Body, No Crime has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: February 1, 2025. (Reviewed version).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the No Body, No Crime article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Songs

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong

Taylor Swift Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taylor Swift, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Taylor Swift on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Taylor SwiftWikipedia:WikiProject Taylor SwiftTemplate:WikiProject Taylor SwiftTaylor Swift
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Country music Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Country music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to country music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Country musicWikipedia:WikiProject Country musicTemplate:WikiProject Country musicCountry music
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Roots music Low‑importance

	Music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Roots music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to roots, folk and traditional folk music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Roots musicWikipedia:WikiProject Roots musicTemplate:WikiProject Roots musicRoots music
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Pop music Low‑importance

	Pop music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Rock music Low‑importance

	Rock music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

Passed. Locust member (talk) 02:35, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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.

This review is transcluded from Talk:No Body, No Crime/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Medxvo (talk · contribs) 11:20, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Locust member (talk · contribs) 17:24, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey!! I'll be taking this one. I have two GANs and one other review going on right now so sorry if I don't review this one as quickly as I usually try to. Will still get this done ASAP tho!! Locust member (talk) 17:24, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! No rush, please take your time. I'm also looking forward to reviewing more of your GANs very soon since you have so many and I appreciate your work :)) Medxvo (talk) 17:38, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: 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):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Well Written

Long Pond could be added to infobox.
- Done.

Maybe a nitpick but I would remove the comma after "Swift" in the first sentence of the lead.
- Done.

In the sentence starting with Some publications compared the composition, I would place the references after the mention. For example, after "Before He Cheats (2006)," I would add the Slate source, etc.
- There are some sources that agreed on the same songs; Vulture agreed with Slate on "Before He Cheats" and with Billboard on "Goodbye Earl", and they additionally added "Independence Day" and Miranda Lambert's music influences, so I put the three sources together to indicate that there is some form of consensus for some of the songs, but let me know if I should change this.
  - Ah, makes sense. My apologies!

You could mention the Este character is named after Este Haim, verified by The List
- I was thinking about adding this while writing the article but isn't this a bit superfluous? I think it would be clear to a reader that it was inspired by/named after Este Haim since we mentioned her name in the background and production section, it's a bit trivial in my opinion...
  - I wouldn't say it was trivial? " The narrative revolves around a woman named Este, named after Este Haim, who confronts her cheating husband and is subsequently murdered." I feel like would read decently well? Lemme know if you still disagree.
    - That's a good suggestion, added. I'll leave the Entertainment Weekly source as it is without adding The List source since both support this information

Swift's songwriting not as strong as on her past songs about revenge. - the "on" here sounds a bit out of place.
- I think "on" makes sense. "Swift's song not as strong as her past songs" / "Swift's songwriting not as strong as on her past songs", I think there is a difference, as we usually say "her songwriting on the track". Please correct me if I'm mistaken.
  - Understandable

Factually accurate and verifiable

Most sources appear reliable per WP:RSP and/or WP:A/S. Y

Riff Magazine has a large editorial team and staff. Y

Slovakia [41] shows the current chart, not from when this song charted.
- There is a note in the citation that says "Note: Select 9. týden 2021 in the date selector".
  - Ahh, I see.

Spot check

[10] Y
[12] Y
[15] Y
[21] Y

Broad

Has all of the standard songs stuff and does not veer off topic. Y

Neutral point of view

Y

Stable

No edit wars or disputes within the past 14 days. Y

Illustrated

Cover art has fair use rationale and contains ALT text. Performance image has been reviewed and has correct licensing. Y

Overall

I have not finished my review yet, but this is what I have got so far. Will try to get this done by Friday!
@Medxvo: Nice job as always with this article; this was definitely my favorite from you yet, a very fun read. I will put this On hold for now !!
@Locust member: Thanks a lot for the very kind words, I truly appreciate it. I really enjoyed writing the article, and I'm very pleased you enjoyed reading it as well :))) I've addressed/responded to your points, and thanks again for the review! Medxvo (talk) 01:55, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely!! I responded to all and still have one that needs further discussion, but the rest looks great :-) Locust member (talk) 02:15, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Replied there, all should be done now! :)) Medxvo (talk) 02:28, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All looks good now! Happy to ✓ Pass this one, congrats !! Locust member (talk) 02:32, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]