Wikipedia:Peer review/Just Dance/archive1

Just Dance

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… I'm wanting this article to achieve atleast A-Class status if nothing more. I was just wondering if any reviewers' would take the time to review the article. Iv'e tooken the time too analyse the article myself to check grammar and add stuff where needed. And so have many other contributers. If you could give me some feedback on this article me and other wikipedians would be very much appreciated.

Thanks, -- Sprite7868 (talk) 10:49, 03 April 2010 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: Apologies for the time that it's taken, but here we are, finally. I bow to your obviously considerable knowledge of this topic, so my comments are mainly about style and presentation issues. I can't do the lot in one pass, but here's enough for a beginning.

• External links. There are numerous dead links: refs [24], [25], [27], [29], [48], [73], [77]. Oddly, these are not the deadlinks thatshow red when the tool (top right corner box] is used. However, they all need fixing. Perhaps check out all the others.
• Images: these are on the whole excellent, but you may be pushing it a bit to justify two non-free images. The album cover is probably OK, based on precedents, but I think File:Gagadance.JPG will be questioned.
• References: I'm not in a position to judge whether these are all reliable, though most look as though they are. Some minor queries:-
  • [1] Should be expanded to be a little more informative.
  • [16] What is the relationship between about.com and The New York Times?
  • [20] Not necesary to give the publisher of The Washington Post. Just enter the paper's name as "work" in the template.
  • [30] Appears to be unformatted
  • [90] Inconsistent format of retrieval date information.
• Prose etc
  • "while also featuring labelmate Colby O'Donis". "Labelmate" is a jargonish term – I don't know what it means – but the general phrasing "while also featuring" is poor. "...and also features" would be neater.
  • "and lyrically speaks" – verb normally precedes adverb, e.g. "and speaks lyrically..."
  • Lead second paragraph: two successive sentences begin "The song..." It's a tricky one, but the first sentence could be rephrased: "Critics have complimented the song's club anthem-like nature..." or some such simplification.
  • "appearing in a party" - should that be "at a party"?
  • "Gaga compared her experience of shooting the video with being on a Martin Scorsese set." This sentence in isolation reads rather oddly. Suggest either amplify to give it some context, or maybe just leave it for the detailed quotation later in the article.
  • As a general point of style, blockquotes should not be used for shorter quotations. MOS recommends minimum four lines of text per blockquote, otherwise the quote should remain in the body of the text. That's not a hard and fast rule, but I would say that both quotes in the "Writing and Inspiration" section, and the later one begnning "I was sick..." are all too short for blockquote format.
  • In the "Writing and Inspiration" quote, Gaga says she wrote the song in 10 minutes. The following paragraph says she wrote it "during January" and that it was "hard work". Can these accounts be reconciled?
  • Irony note: "'Just Dance' is a happy record" - now look at the expressions on the faces of Gaga and her group after a performance of the song; happy, eh? (You needn't respond to this comment)
  • "explained with Artistdirect.com " should be "explained to"
  • "Music and lyrics section: In general, this section is going to be hard for the uninitiated to follow. A few points:-
    • "The song combines synths of clipped marching beats, sawing electronics and contains mild R&B infused beats." Not grammatical as written. Needs a "with" somewhere.
    • Some combination of the shorter sentences would improve the flow, e.g. "The song is set in compound time with a moderate beat rate of 124 beats per minute, and is written in the key of C♯ minor."
    • "Gaga's vocal spans the two octaves of G₃ to C₅." This notation will not be widely understood, needs to be properly explained.
  • The word "keytar" should have a link

Will try to finish later. Brianboulton (talk) 21:47, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the comments Brian. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 12:02, 20 April 2010 (UTC)