Talk:Befour (song)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Befour (song) 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

Befour (song) was nominated as a Music good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (October 23, 2016). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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 articles

Status[edit]

@FanofPopMusic: Hey! Do you have any plans to nominate this for GA? It is a great article all-in-all... :) Carbrera (talk) 17:54, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Befour (song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: CaliforniaDreamsFan (talk · contribs) 06:19, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, my name is CaliforniaDreamsFan, and I'll be reviewing your article! Full review coming soon, so stay tuned!

Infobox[edit]

Remove cover and caption since its unnecessary here.

Lead section[edit]

Add RCA (and link) after its release date,
"with influences of disco and soul elements." — "which incorporates musical elements of disco and soul music."
"The song is also noted for Malik's high-reaching falsetto" — by who?
Where's a general consensus about the critical reception?
Where's a general consensus about the commercial reception?

Background and release[edit]

Add comma after album in first sentence of second paragraph.
"he showed a few tracks" — from the album? Specify.
Everything else is spot on!

Composition and lyrics[edit]

Unlink Zayn Malik and Malay, and just use Malik on wards.
"Befour" is a smooth R&B and synthpop song, with disco and soul elements." — Change it to the comment above in lead section.
"which made critics believe that the song also addresses critics of his career with his former band One Direction, and possibly the band itself, due to its title, "Befour", which includes the number four, which is also the current number of the band members" — You may wanna break it into two sentences, since there is two main views of the track's meaning, and change a bit of wording such as "which" as it becomes repetitive.
"Time for me to move up / So many hours have gone / Heart beats the pump of my blood / No strings for you to pull on / You've got your tongue in your cheek / So pardon if I don't speak," he sings in the song's second verse." — It's relevant because?
"was interpreted" by who? by Zayn or critics perspective?

Critical reception[edit]

Add a general consensus about the critical reception.
Add "similarly" before "Tim Sendra".
Also, the starting structure, such as "Erin Strecker of Billboard" or "Tim Sendra of AllMusic" or "Leah Greenblatt of Entertainment Weekly", is starting to become repetitive; change it up by saying something like, "Billboard's Erin Strecker", or "Tim Sendra, writing for AllMusic".

Music video[edit]

Where was it released? YouTube? Vevo?
Add "a" before "fish and chips".

Credits and personnel[edit]

Divide the personnel into two columns.

Other additional notes[edit]

Why isn't there any information in the article about its charting performance? Because the track has charted, it needs a chart sub-section in order for me to see whether it passes the GA (point 3. for WP:GA criteria).

Overall GA conclusion[edit]

A really good article! On hold for 7 days for additional editing. Please ping me for any inquires or when you have finished! Good luck CaliforniaDreamsFan (talk · contribs} 06:37, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There are multiple issues I can see in the references with regard to formatting that have not picked up on above. — Calvin999 17:00, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Calvin999: Enough of the WP:HOUNDING. I will no longer tolerate your harassment. Carbrera (talk) 02:46, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm neither hounding nor harassing. If you cared about the quality of this article, you would take a different approach and ask me what needs correcting instead. — Calvin999 08:27, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yet again (sigh), I have to apologize here as well. I didn't see this, so I would like you to correct these errors please. Just to finish off with this statement; I do not think he is harassing in this case as it is viable to have everything correct, but as editors that can review in our own skill sets and abilities, I would appreciate total respect for each and everyone's reviews and helpers regardless. Thank you, CaliforniaDreamsFan (talk · contribs} 03:36, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Inconsistency in the Credits section too. — Calvin999 08:33, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Given the editor nearly a month to do editing, but still nothing to avail. Failing the article. Good luck next time if you re-submit. CaliforniaDreamsFan (talk · contribs} 10:24, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]