Talk:First Time (Lifehouse song)/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Mattchewbaca (meow) 23:33, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:

Many of the claims in the Chart performance section are unsubstantiated.

The claims are not unsubstantiated. The Launch icon on each reference shows the chart's debut, weeks on chart, and peak position. - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 02:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

touché Mattchewbaca (meow) 23:17, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

The changing vibrant color that occurs in the background as the song gets stronger. Is the song lifting weights?

Done

Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Lead

Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article. Done

According to WP:LEAD#Length, the article should have one or two paragraphs in the lead because the article is less than 15,000 characters in length. - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 02:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The song charted at twenty-six and forty-seven respectively A crucial noun is missing here. Done

What crucial noun? - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 02:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

later charted in New Zealand. Ok... what number? Done
Lifehouse has performed the song live on several occasions. Jesus Harold Christ on a rubber crutch!!! Lifehouse has performed the song live on several occasions!?!?

This summarizes when and where Lifehouse has performed the song live. - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 02:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse my dirty mouth, but Lifehouse has performed the song live on several occasions. is kind of a no-shit sherlock statement. Try Lifehouse has performed the song live on nationally broadcast late-night television shows. Mattchewbaca (meow) 23:17, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Done[reply]

Background and release

Section has a total of 114 words, give or take, sixty of which are dedicated to a quote. That's messed. Done

How is that messed? Good articles such as U Smile use a similiar prose. - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 02:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are a vast number of synonyms for the word solicited (which you have used twice now), pick one. Done

There is nothing in Wikipedia policy of using the same word twice in an article. - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 02:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The reason for linking mainstream a second time is? Done
Where is Who We Are ? Done

The Who We Are article talks about the release of the single. - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 02:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Roger all points. Mattchewbaca (meow) 23:17, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Composite and critical reception

"First Time" is described as a rock song by iTunes.[5] Weak. Done

This source is not weak because it describes the genre of the song from a reliable source. - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 02:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Roger. Mattchewbaca (meow) 23:17, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chart performance

Should be a subsection in Composite and critical reception section. Done

It should stand alone as a section because it has enough information to stay as a section. - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 02:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I guess you're lucky then, huh? You get a chance to argue your case. Why didn't you extend the same courtesy to the GA nominator of this article, that you quick-failed, after you suggested their article receive the same treatment? Mattchewbaca (meow) 23:17, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Billboard is linked five times in this section, four times in Charts, and an additional five times in References. You do the math. Done

I fixed the linking on the "Chart performance" section. However, with Template:Singlechart, it automatically wiki-links Billboard in the "Charts" section. In the "References" section, there is no policy of wiki-linking the reference multiple times. - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 02:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:REPEATLINK – Mattchewbaca (meow) 23:17, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

With Template:Singlechart, it automatically wiki-links "Billboard" in it. There is nothing I can do about that. Otherwise, all over-linking has been fixed. - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 18:50, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It moved up and down the chart Overtly sexual statement. Done

There is nothing sexual about this. It is describing what happened to the song's chart position over the course of time. - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 02:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

eventually peaked at number 26. See foolowing comment. Done
peaking at number forty-seven You gonna use words or numbers? Done
It has since peaked at number sixteen after being on the chart for twenty consecutive weeks.[16] Considering the single was released over four years ago, I doubt there is very much has since going on with it. Done
The song also achieved international success. It debuted and peaked on the New Zealand Singles Chart at number thirty-one for the week of July 30, 2007.[21] Success is a reach, more like recognition. Avoid one sentence paragraphs. Done

I agree with you on this. However, shouldn't New Zealand have its own separate paragraph because the song charted internationally? - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 02:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is Canada not international? The song also achieved very limited international success. Try "First Time" also charted internationally. Mattchewbaca (meow) 23:17, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Live performances

Should be a subsection in Composite and critical reception section. Done

U Smile is another good article in music and it has its own section for "Live performances". - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 02:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I get it, the same subsections that you recommend for other articles don't apply to yours, right? Mattchewbaca (meow) 23:17, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Music video

The music video was shot in Los Angeles and features real couples falling in love for the first time.[27] Should be the first sentence in the second paragraph, and In the music video, should be removed from the aforementioned paragraph. Done

Credits and personnel

De-link Jason Wade and Jude Cole. Done
There is no working reference to support the information in this section; please find another source. Done

I disagree. Good articles like Next 2 You (Chris Brown song) use liner notes as a reference to personnel. - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 02:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Then why did you insist on a working reference for this article that you GA reviewed? Mattchewbaca (meow) 23:17, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Who We Are es a no linky. Done

See above comment. - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 02:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Charts

No references for singles chart information. Done

There are references in this section. - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 02:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, according to you there weren't references in this singles chart either when you reviewed it for GA, correct? Mattchewbaca (meow) 23:17, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I overlooked it again, and it did have references in ALL sections. - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 19:45, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References

All references are not properly formatted. Done

According to WP:REF, the sources are properly formatted. - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 02:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is Billboard a magazine? Mattchewbaca (meow) 23:17, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is, so it should be italicized. - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 19:48, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No authors, no dates, some work, no work, some publishers, no publishers, links like sausage, generally just FUBAR. Done

I disagree with this. Authors are only needed when citing a literary work, like a magazine or a book. Dates are only needed if the article provides one. There are publishers in every reference in this article. - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 02:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, for Billboard, it has to be either Nielsen Business Media or Prometheus Global Media. It can't be both. Mattchewbaca (meow) 23:17, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the references for Billboard to Prometheus Global Media. - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 19:55, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good, now change them all to Nielsen Business Media. They didn't change ownership until 2009. Mattchewbaca (meow) 23:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notes in closing

This article is On hold to allow time for changes. Mattchewbaca (meow) 23:33, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have addressed all the issues presented for good article status. - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 19:58, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Review Summary

Problems still exist with the article that at this time that do not permit its inclusion as a GA. The lead needs to be at least three paragraphs, which can be done with the information that is present at the moment. Problems still remain within the prose throughout. Billboard only needs to be mentioned once in the Chart performance section. Subsections were not created as requested. Fair use rationale for the cover art needs to provide the name of the record label and name of the photographer, if known. References are not properly formatted and over-linking still persists. Mattchewbaca (meow) 23:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer banned[edit]

Following the banning of the reviewer for incivility and bad faith, I have renominated with the original time stamp. See WP:Administrator's noticeboard/Incidents#User:Mattchewbaca Jezhotwells (talk) 15:05, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]