Talk:Give It 2 Me/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

~~"American" really shouldn't be linked per WP:OVERLINK.~~
…but is actually a reference to Madonna's near three decade survival in the music industry. Is their any other way to rewrite "three decade survival"?
…with most critics complimenting it for being a self-empowerment anthem and its dance beat while comparing it to the joyous early Madonna compositions. The line doesn't flow well. Perhaps splitting up will help.
…while it attained top ten positions elsewhere in the world. It should be clarified that it peaked in the top ten of several music charts around the world.

In an interview with MTV Australia, Madonna explained that a prominent theme of the album is about becoming a boxer… Clarify which album.
This was changed following the release of a similar song by Timbaland. Calling Timbaland's song "similar" is misleading. Perhaps reword it to something like, This was changed following the release of a song by the same title by Timbaland.

The song builds into a blistering crescendo…' What does "blistering" mean here? Also, it would be a good idea to link crescendo.
~~The line She does not want to stop her career and can continue on doesn't read very encyclopedic.~~

This section reads like a list. Most sentences have the format of "___ of ___ called the song ___". It would work better if you made statements about trends in the reviews and then backed them up with quotes.
comment Good articles and featured articles such as janet., "Burn (Usher song)", "Bohemian Rhapsody" and Thriller, "Déjà Vu (Beyoncé Knowles song)", "Hey Jude" and "Hey Ya!" also follow this format. Since we are dealing with individual writer's critique of the song, it's not unusual to present the information in "list" format. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 04:34, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Upon its release to radio, it gained airplay on a few pop radio stations and the single failed to re-chart on the Hot 100 chart. This line is not cited.
…hence limited airplay was the reason this single failed to re-chart. Is this original research?
…and spent six weeks at number one. There doesn't seem to be cited.
~~Is it really necessary to include all the dates of when the song charted or peaked?~~

The video also features Pharrell Williams. This sentence all on its own doesn't flow well. Try combining it with another sentence.
…and premiered on Channel 4 in the United Kingdom on June 5. What's notable about this?
It premiered on MTV's TRL in the United States on June 10. Same as above.
~~The dresses were made by fashion brands like Chanel and Roberto Cavalli. → The dresses were designed by several fashion brands, including Chanel and Roberto Cavalli.~~
As the bridge builds up… A bridge or bridge (music)?
On the chorus, she dances and plays with an archlight and fondles with long black fur. She dances on the chorus?
…Williams is shown getting stupid while dragging a bag along the floor behind Madonna. What does "getting stupid" actually mean?
MTV said that the essence of the video was Madonna's 1990 compilation album. Please clarify; I'm not exactly sure what this means.
Madonna wore a cow-girl hat during the black and white footage, similarly as she had in the music video for the song "Music" and also contained elements from her 2006 Confessions Tour in the dance choreography. The text in bold becomes a run-on sentence.
~~In the quote by MTV, We're officially sold. Again. seems irrelevant.~~

…Madonna and her back-up dancers jumped up with their hands stiffly up in the air. What does "stiffly" mean? It's really obscure.

~~File:Give It 2 Me.jpg does not comply with fair use. Please reduce the size of the image to at least 300×300 px.~~

Done. Rest I'll do tomorrow. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 12:11, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~I am placing the article on hold for seven days to allow for the above concerns to be addressed. Additional comments may be made afterward. — Σ xplicit 00:39, 30 May 2009 (UTC)~~[reply]

All of the concerns have been addressed. Thanks for the wonderful review. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 10:18, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added an additional comment above. — Σ xplicit 20:35, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have addressed them. Please see whether its fine.--Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:42, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All concerns have been addressed, I'm passing the article. Good work! — Σ xplicit 18:37, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]