Latest comment: 6 years ago26 comments2 people in discussion
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 is a well-written, well-researched, concise article. There are a few things I'd like to discuss, and once they are resolved, I would be happy to promote this article. I've also made a few changes, mostly minor, to the article myself.
Overall (pass/fail): On hold
Structure issues
We have two sections, "Chart performance" and "Charts" – perhaps they could be merged, witch "Charts" as a subsection (level 3 header) of "Chart performance", possibly even the "Certifications".
Could "Release history" possibly be merged into "Release and promotion"?
For both these points its a no for me. The charts and release paragraphs are always separated from the actual tabular representation to differentiate between the tables and content. That's the structural norm presented for all song/album/music articles. —IB[ Poke ] 06:20, 21 August 2017 (UTC)Reply
I don't have any loud objections if you say this is the structural norm, but it strikes me as counterintuitive to separate the two when they are clearly interlinked. Mz7 (talk) 23:35, 23 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
Lead
(prose) "analysed" – I just wanted to double check that we're okay with using British/non-American spellings in this article (could be a MOS:TIES argument since the singer is American)
Writing and development
All issues addressed. Mz7 (talk) 23:39, 23 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
(prose) He recalled sitting with Gaga and feeling a positive vibe, which led then to write the "upbeat and cool" track.
The word "then" here seems to be out-of-place; did you mean "them"? As in: "… which led them to write the "upbeat and cool" track."
Additionally, not sure if this is WP:NPOV violation, but the most neutral way to express this would probably be: "… which led them to write a track Blair felt was "upbeat and cool"."
(WP:V) "one-off release" – Blair does not call it this, the article does.
(prose) Blair described the track as a perfect "one-off release" which after the production was completed, Gaga and her team wanted it to be released as soon as possible.
The word "it" here is unnecessary, since the relative pronoun "which" already refers to the song. Thus, you should change the sentence to read:
Blair described the track as a perfect "one-off release", which, after the production was completed, Gaga and her team wanted to be released as soon as possible.
Alternatively, you can separate the two ideas without using "which":
Blair described the track as a perfect "one-off release". After the production was completed, Gaga and her team wanted it to be released as soon as possible.
(prose) Once completed "The Cure" was decided to be released…
This sentence sounds awkward the way it's structured. Do we know who made the decision to release the song once it was completed? If not, I would rewrite it: "The Cure" was released once it was completed… or perhaps "The Cure" was released shortly after it was completed…
(prose) although Gaga was just six months into the life cycle of her fifth studio album era
Lay readers may confuse this as six months into the production of her fifth studio album. I would reword it to something clearer and simpler, such as: "…although Gaga had released Joanne, her fifth studio album, six months prior."
(prose) Since the composition hearkened back to the singer's dance-pop songs, White Shadow explained…
Earlier in this paragraph, White Shadow is referred to as "Blair". Although they describe the same person, I would try to maintain consistency. Use either "White Shadow" or "Blair", but avoid switching back and forth between both.
Something to consider adding to provide an extra layer of background for readers: Right before "Since the composition hearkened back to the singer's dance-pop songs," you may want to explain how Gaga's style had evolved before "The Cure". In other words, the article explains that the composition "hearkens back" to a particular style, but it doesn't explain how the style had changed in the first place.
All good, all good. Mz7 (talk) 00:00, 24 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
(WP:V) Could just be me, but the iTunes/Apple Music source is not showing me the liner notes or other verification of who co-wrote the song. In any case, the Entertainment Weekly source that comes directly afterward verifies everything that that sentence states, so I think we can safely remove the iTunes source and solely use the EW one.
Well I updated the source to reflect how the liner notes are appearing. Once the song is added to the iTunes playlist, the songwriter and producers appear in the metadata. —IB[ Poke ] 05:04, 1 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
(style) Sonically the track begins slow, the first verse is backed… – We have a comma splice here, so I would replace the comma with a semicolon (;).
(prose) An editor from The Guardian noted that… – I don't think this is a big deal for this particular article, but I wanted to bring your attention to WP:SAID, which advises caution when using the word "noted" as a synonymous for "said" or "wrote".
Usage of Musicnotes.com for composition/music theory information – I've seen this before, and I just wanted to ask to make sure that the sheet music on that website is "official" and reflects how the studio song is actually composed. I know some arrangements transpose the music or abridge it in some way.
Musicnotes.com is fine for adding the chord and key related details, provided that one attribute it as coming from Musicnotes and the key in which the song sheet music is listed in the website. —IB[ Poke ] 05:23, 20 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
(WP:NPOV) Lyrically, the song talks about the healing effect of love from her fans who had supported the singer throughout her career.
The cited article from Bustle states, "her new synth-pop, EDM-inspired song … serves as a shout out to the healing powers of love, likely from fans who support her."
Whereas the Bustle article merely speculates that the song is about fans, the Wikipedia article currently goes a step further and states that the song is about fans.
Consider rewording this sentence (and the content that follows) to provide in-text attribution for the Bustle writer. In other words, explain that this is her viewpoint. For example, "Lyrically, the song talks about the healing effect of love. Danielle Jackson, in an article published by Bustle, commented that the song may refer to love from the fans who had supported Gaga throughout her career."
Reworded as per suggestion. —IB[ Poke ] 05:23, 20 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
Release and promotion
All issues addressed. Mz7 (talk) 00:05, 24 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
(WP:V) "I've been so excited for this next part of the show because I've been trying to keep it a secret for so long. I've been in the studio and I'd like to debut a brand new song, 'The Cure'" and played the song for the first time.
Forbes article does not contain this quote specifically
(WP:V) It was sent to American contemporary hit radio stations on April 25, 2017.
The source here appears to be a page that simply lists upcoming releases from artists that previously made Top 40. As I understand it, songs aren't "sent" to radio stations, but rather, individual radio stations are the ones that decide which songs to license and play. On this basis, I would remove this sentence.
Check the archived source, it lists "The Cure" and the date. New songs cannot be randomly chosen by radio stations to play. They need to be sent to the station by label. Usually it happens through e-mail where the song is attached (including any radio edit). Once an album is released in market, any song from that album can be played by radio. However, there are still official radio adds date for them too, since it is always from a particular day that radio decides to add the song to their daily playlists. Otherwise it can be played randomly, or on adhoc basis. —IB[ Poke ] 05:23, 20 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
Critical reception
All issues addressed. Mz7 (talk) 00:35, 24 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
(WP:NPOV) The first paragraph spends a rather disproportionate amount of time discussing the Lipschutz article in Billboard. Per WP:UNDUE, I would try to remove nonessential details to bring it in balance with the other sources int he article.
(prose) He noted that…, Hugh McIntyre from Forbes noted…, while noting that…
Again, be wary of the word "note" and the advice at WP:SAID. In the case of the McIntyre article, I would actually suggest changing the word "noted" and "noting" there, since it's an opinion article, rather than one based on factual evidence.
(prose) The New York Post called the track a "dud" stating that it was "alarmingly generic" and that Gaga was not "trying hard enough"
Hardeep Phull is the author of the article that was cited for this quote. I would attribute the sentence to him, rather than the New York Post, as otherwise it sounds like the editorial board of the Post as a whole is writing this review.
Chart performance
(prose) It has reached number 20 on the Mainstream Top 40 and number 17 on the Adult Pop Songs charts.
As of when?
Resolved
Credits and personnel
Where do you see the credits in the iTunes Store? I can't seem to find it.
Resolved
Charts
All issues addressed. Mz7 (talk) 00:35, 24 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
In the Latvian source, there is text to the right that says "NEDĒĻAS TOPĀ". Google Translate tells me this means "TOP OF THE WEEK", but I suppose it's not "peak position", right?
Russia chart (Tophit): I don't see where it mentions position 186, but is 186 noteworthy enough to mention in the first place anyway?
Venezuela chart
I can see "Million Reasons" at 12, but not "The Cure" at 7.
External links
Just to note for myself, MetroLyrics with the "LyricFind" logo are apparently okay to link to as far as copyright is concerned, according to the MetroLyrics article and this information page.
Images
All issues addressed. Mz7 (talk) 23:52, 23 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
To avoid being misleading, you might want to adjust the caption so that it's clear the photograph was taken in 2014, i.e. not the same event at which Gaga performed.
Note: The original photographer at Flickr stopped indicating on their file page that their photograph is available under the CC-BY license (it's not CC BY-NC, which is incompatible with Wikimedia). However, Creative Commons licenses are irrevocable, so this shouldn't be a problem, but I wanted to note it nonetheless.
Please let me know if you have any questions or are confused by anything I have written here. All the best, Mz7 (talk) 07:33, 9 August 2017 (UTC)Reply
Thanks a lot for this detailed review @Mz7:. I would take a few days to process them as I am between exams and traveling. Hope that's fine. —IB[ Poke ] 04:10, 10 August 2017 (UTC)Reply
@IndianBio: That's absolutely fine! Thanks for letting me know. Mz7 (talk) 04:14, 10 August 2017 (UTC)Reply
Just to let you know that I have started working on the review comments. Thanks for waiting. —IB[ Poke ] 17:01, 20 August 2017 (UTC)Reply
@IndianBio: Awesome. Ping me when you're ready for me to re-review. Mz7 (talk) 18:13, 22 August 2017 (UTC)Reply
@IndianBio: Hey, it's been about a week, and I just wanted to check in on this. How much time do you envision to have to work on this article in the near future? Mz7 (talk) 05:39, 30 August 2017 (UTC)Reply
Hi Mz7, I have actually been making all the changes in a separate sandbox. I think within the next couple of days I can merge it here and update you. I am extremely sorry for keeping you waiting so so long. I admire the review that you have given (no one takes that much time nowadays for GANs sadly) and I wanna give justice to it. —IB[ Poke ] 05:44, 30 August 2017 (UTC)Reply
Hi @Mz7:, finally we reached there. I am done with the review comments haha. —IB[ Poke ] 06:10, 20 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
Hi IndianBio. I just want to acknowledge that I've seen your note here, and I've just been a little busy with some real life work. I'll try to get to this as soon as I can. Worst case scenario, I'll have responses up by the end of the weekend, though I'll try my best to get them in by tomorrow. Mz7 (talk) 18:58, 22 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
@IndianBio: Upon reviewing the improvements you made, I think you did a good job of responding to my comments. I don't have any issues with your improvements that would prevent me from passing this as a GA. Aoba47's comment on the talk page appears also to have been addressed in the last paragraph of "Release and promotion", where the Joanne tour is mentioned. For these reasons, I do now pass this review. Thanks for your hard, quality work on this article! Mz7 (talk) 00:46, 24 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
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.
On hold
Resolved
Pass
