Talk:Runaway Baby/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

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

Reviewer: Shane Cyrus (talk · contribs) 14:56, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Will only have time to review this in April.--Shane Cyrus (talk) 14:56, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

• ", which appears as the fourth track on" --> "for"  Done
• "It was written by Mars, Philip Lawrence, Ari Levine and Brody Brown and produced by he former three, under their alias, The Smeezingtons." --> "It was written by Mars, Philip Lawrence, Ari Levine, who produced the track under their alias The Smeezingtons, along with Brody Brown."  Done
• Try avoiding "track" so much and use "song" instead.  Done; you should use a wide range of vocabulary, not only "song". However, I replaced some of those by the name of he song. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 15:48, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
• "The performances, which include an extra break with a James Brown dance and singing through a megaphone, are highly acclaimed by critics" -- Remove the "highly acclaimed stuff" which is a violation of WP:PEACOCK.  Done
• ""Runaway Baby" is a retro[1][2] funk,[1][3][4] soul,[1][2][5] bubblegum R&B[1][6] and pop rock track.[2][5]" -- This is overlinked. One source or max 2 is enough per genre.  Done
• "since he is willing to break their hearts due to be a lady's man," -- Sure grammatical mistake here.
• ""Runaway Baby" has received mixed reviews from most music critics." -- Remove "most"  Done
• musicOMH is not a reliable source.  Not done Who said? Show me the wiki page/discussion claiming such. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 15:49, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
• The live performances section is a mess. Convert all passive sentences to active format.  Done, check it again I might have missed soemthing. I tried to improve the section as well. But you are not giving me any guidelines.
• "Jill concluded that Mars, "didn’t want people watching his performance; he wanted them to experience it." -- This is paraphrasing. You have to use your own language here.
• Remove "The song was made available to purchase on iTunes.[41]". -- So irrelevant to this section.  Done
• " Mars also sung the track " seriously? what would you rather have here?

Overview

This will require a lot of work to pass. Grammatically it is a mess and it is obviously written by a die hard fan. I'll give you the standard seven days to address these concerns.--Shane Cyrus (talk) 12:33, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

@Shane Cyrus: So twelve mistakes, some of those are not grammatically, and you claim its a mess? We have quite different perspectives on that. I'm not sure you know what you are doing. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 15:23, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

@MarioSoulTruthFan: I had to do a lot of cleanup but I have decided to pass this. Congrats!--Shane Cyrus (talk) 15:59, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

@Shane Cyrus:I left you a question could you please answer? Thank you. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 16:07, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Your attitude is appearing toxic. I passed the article, I had to clean up grammatical errors from a whole section to pass this. I didn't want to fail it because you seem very dedicated to Bruno (and have been a member for 9 years). I made some fixups and passed this. The article has been promoted and this discussion now officially comes to halt.--Shane Cyrus (talk) 16:17, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Undoing listing by just-blocked sockpuppet

MarioSoulTruthFan, this "review" was conducted by a sockpuppet of MaranoFan, an indefinitely blocked user whose sock account as Shane Cyrus was blocked minutes after he "passed" the review. Since this was clearly a problematic review from the start, I am reverting it and putting the nomination back into the reviewing pool with no loss of seniority, in the hopes that it finds a competent and problem-free reviewer. I'm sorry you were a victim of this. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:16, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

@BlueMoonset: It's ok and thank you. I didn't like his review to be honest. Should I revert everything he did? MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 20:31, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

MarioSoulTruthFan, it's up to you whether you want to revert his edits to the article. You should certainly review them to make sure they don't harm the article. I've already taken care of the article page (removed the GA icon) and the article talk page (fixed the GA nominee template), so no need to do them. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:41, 18 March 2017 (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.