Talk:She's American/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: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 08:39, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

I have become very familiar with this fantastic song after hearing it so much on the work playlist, so a review is my pleasure! --K. Peake 08:39, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Infobox and lead

• Recording date is not sourced in the body; it is only said that they announced the album in 2015  Done
• "and Americans, ultimately creating" → "and Americans, creating"  Done
• "about what it means to be a British rockstar courting" → "about the nuances of a British rockstar courting" per the body  Done

• Should it be a direct copy of what is said in the body or is it better to reword and avoid repetition? Giacobbe ^talk 18:09, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

• Re-wording is preferable, but are you sure the above is an accurate way of doing so? --K. Peake 08:49, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

• The word "futuristic" is not notable in the lead for the synths  Not done

• I disagree with you here. I believe it's an appropriate descriptor; simply saying the song contains synths seems vague. Giacobbe ^talk 18:09, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

• Yeah you are probably right actually, especially since this makes more sense than adding gooey here. --K. Peake 08:49, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

• "that incorporates elements of" → "with elements of"  Done
• Are you sure "frantic" is appropriate language for describing the romance reworded from comp?  Done
• "attracted to things that" → "who is attracted to things that" to be specific  Done
• Merge the second para with the third, as the former is only two sentences long  Done

• Mine appears as four sentences. Merging them creates a nine sentence paragraph. Does this appear different for your viewer? Giacobbe ^talk 18:09, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

• I said second para with the third, not first; the second is only two sentences about comp/lyrics... that is too short. --K. Peake 08:49, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

• @Kyle Peake: Yes, I know what you meant, and you are correct in terms of sentences. While originally the paragraphs had 597, 391, and 638 characters, respectively, there is now a small 597-character first paragraph and a nearly double-sized 1,021-character second paragraph. Looks odd in my opinion, but you're the reviewer! Giacobbe ^talk 17:15, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

• "Upon release, "She's American" received" → "Upon release, the song received"  Done
• "who praised the song's" → "who praised the"  Done
• "It reached number 176" → "The song reached number 176"  Done
• "The song was later certified silver" → "It has been certified silver" since there is no mention of when the song charted here  Not done

• Seems rather trivial to change. It was released, and then certified at a later date. Giacobbe ^talk 18:22, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

• With the upon release part being earlier in this para, I believe things are fine like this actually. --K. Peake 08:49, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

• The iconography part is not mentioned in the music video section; either replace with Healy dancing in front of a video screen or source it  Done

Background and development

• Surround the ellipsis by [] on the quote box, plus wikilink tongue-in-cheek and pipe rock to Rock music  Partly done

• Are you sure about the ellipsis? Per MOS guidelines: "When an ellipsis (...) is used to indicate that material is removed from a direct quotation, it should not normally be bracketed". I just recently learned of this myself. Giacobbe ^talk 18:29, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

• Oh sorry I never saw this guideline, no change needed after all! --K. Peake 08:49, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

• I don't think [4] is needed because unlike "Love Me", there is succeeding prose to back up commercial success  Done
• "referring to fixing his teeth and whether that was" → "that refers to fixing his teeth and if it was"  Done
• Pipe rock to Rock music  Done
• "and told the interviewer:" → "telling the interviewer:"  Done
• "was officially released by" → "was released by" because "officially" is pointless when you mention the labels  Done
• Remove the release date from the end of the sentence, as it is already at the start  Done

Music and lyrics

• Audio sample text looks good!
• "of four minutes and 30 seconds" → "of 4 minutes and 30 seconds" per MOS:NUM on comparative values  Done
• Does the part about funk guitar licks refer to licks of that guitar type or guitar licks that are classified as the funk genre? If the former, wikilink funk guitar per MOS:LINK2SECT.  Done

• I'm not exactly sure, can't hurt to link it though. Giacobbe ^talk 18:42, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

• Only the solo part should be kept for the saxophone, as one source says about "a rogue saxophone" and the other mentions a saxophone cameo on the song  Done
• "warning of mistaking the "frenzy" of the moment" → "warning of mistaking the moment" per none of the sources mentioning any frenzy  Done

• I had it sourced somewhere, but I can't be bothered to go through them all again. Giacobbe ^talk 18:46, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

• Shouldn't [22] be solely at the end of the sentence before [29]?  Done

Reception

• Pipe John Hughes to John Hughes (filmmaker)  Done
• "and said it" → "and said the song"  Done

• Are you sure this isn't too much repetition? The word "song" is already used earlier in the sentence. Giacobbe ^talk 18:57, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

• Write "the track" here then, as "it" has been used earlier in the sentence. --K. Peake 08:49, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

• Italicise The Verge  Done
• "Writing for Idobi," → "Writing for idobi,"  Done
• Remove or replace The Red & Black per WP:RSSM  Not done

• Per WP:RSSM: "They can sometimes be considered reliable on other topics, although professional sources are typically preferred when available." Given that it is independent from the university (and therefore isn't subject to undue influence or bias), is award-winning, and has operated for 128 years, its inclusion seems fine. Giacobbe ^talk 19:02, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

• Oh right this does make sense then, particularly when you take into context that it is only used for reception. --K. Peake 08:49, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

• "Following the release of the track's parent album," → "Following the release of I Like It When You Sleep, for You Are So Beautiful yet So Unaware of It,"  Done
• "the 1975 are successful" → "Healy is successful" per the source  Done
• "The Irish Times's Lauren Murphy" → "The Irish Times' Lauren Murphy" for correct grammar  Done
• "but lack conviction and sound too much" → "but lack[s] conviction and sound[s] too much" plus put at least some of the rest of this quote in your own words per WP:QUOTEFARM and to focus on the song rather than the group  Done
• Not too sure about The Harvard Crimson since it is said at WP:RSSM that reputable student outlets like this "can sometimes be considered reliable on other topics, although professional sources are typically preferred when available". Any comments regarding the usage?

• I've used it in several other articles with no issue. Giacobbe ^talk 19:05, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

• "on the US Billboard Hot Rock & Alternative Songs." → "on the US Billboard Hot Rock & Alternative Songs chart."  Done

Music video

• Retitle to Cancelled music video  Done
• Remove "for "She's American"" after the accompanying music video part, as the implication is that it was set to accompany the song  Done
• Are you sure the first sentence's info is in the correct place, or should it be swapped with the second sentence for chronological order?

• It already is in chronological order, no? The band announced the video would be released on Christmas day, and later recanted their statements ("... decided to release a music video for 'Loving Someone' next - instead of 'She's American' as originally planned").

• Added "however", since the announcement of the "She's American" video occurred before the change in release dates. Giacobbe ^talk 17:52, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

• Pipe Christmas Day to Christmas  Done
• "manager, Jamie Osborn, revealed that a visual for" → "manager Jamie Osborn revealed that a visual for fellow album track"  Partly done

• Is this a personal stylistic preference or is there a rule for this? The generally accepted format with vocative commas is to either use one before and after the name, or omit both altogether. Both styles are grammatically correct. Giacobbe ^talk 19:21, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

• From my experience, it seems that commas are only used for names that serve roles in the lead, so the suggestion would be preferable. --K. Peake 08:49, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

• It is grammatically incorrect: "Vocatives should always be used with commas... use a comma before and after a vocative in the middle of the sentence". More explanation here, here, and here. Giacobbe ^talk 17:34, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

• "Numerous teaser clips from" → "Numerous teaser clips for"  Done
• "worked on the set." → "worked on the shoot."  Done
• "was not released." → "was ultimately not released."  Done
• "that it would not" → "that it would likely not" per the source, but is this being after the not released sentence the correct order?  Done
• "Healy Tweeted an" → "Healy tweeted an"  Done
• "while the song played in" → "while the song plays in" for correct tense  Done
• The last sentence of this para is mentioning it not being released again, plus are you sure the speculation isn't WP:TRIVIA?  Partly done

• Reworded a portion of the sentence. In regards to your second question; yes, per the source: "Are The 1975 finally releasing the ‘She’s American’ video?" Giacobbe ^talk 19:31, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

• Not sure why you believe this is trivial. He began teasing the video again, fuelling speculation of its release per the sources own words: "It looks like The 1975 could finally drop their ‘She’s American’ video, two years after it was initially set to debut". Giacobbe ^talk 18:04, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Credits and personnel

• Add this section, especially since there is a sufficient amount of writers and producers to warrant it  Done

• Good catch!! Don't know how I forgot to add that. Giacobbe ^talk 19:36, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Charts

• Why do the brackets say 2016-17 when all of the peaks were in the former year?  Done

Certifications

• Good

References

• Copyvio score appears too high at 47.1% for the Stereogum ref, but that is led to in a good part by the album's title so this is not a problem really
• To fix the cite error with ref 1, invoke it using the ref name on the second instance  Done
• Author-link Annie Zaleski on ref 21  Done
• Idobi → idobi on ref 24  Done
• Cite Idolator as work/website instead for ref 31  Done
• WP:OVERLINK of The Skinny on ref 33  Done
• Remove or replace ref 35 per WP:RSSM
• Cite Zobbel.de instead of Official Charts Company for ref 41 and do so as work/website instead since the source is only showing charts and isn't actually part of OCC officially  Done

External links

• Good

Final comments and verdict

•  On hold until all of the issues are fixed, after blasting through a review of this brilliant soon-to-be-GA track! --K. Peake 16:10, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

• @Kyle Peake: Glad to hear you enjoyed the song!! A highlight from a stellar album. Giacobbe ^talk 19:52, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

• (CA)Giacobbe I have gone over where things still need fixing properly, while crossing out any comments I was mistaken on that you had explained not implementing. --K. Peake 08:49, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

• @Kyle Peake: I believe I've corrected/addressed your remaining comments. Giacobbe ^talk 18:05, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

• (CA)Giacobbe ✓ Pass now, the only remaining issue was with the second para being too long in comparison to the first but I moved the first sentence to fix that for you! --K. Peake 07:23, 8 May 2021 (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.