Talk:Bounce (Iggy Azalea song)/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Cartoon network freak (talk · contribs) 06:45, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi! My user's name is Cartoon network freak (talk) and I'll be reviewing this article against the good article criteria. , the article is near to the GA-status, but first you have to modify some little things in the article. Green text indicates wrong content.

Lead

 * Australian -> link it to Australia
 * WP:OVERLINK and WP:LEDE discourage this.


 * club, trap -> club/ trap
 * "/" indicates "or" or a combination of the two, which is not what is stated in the sources.


 * remove internationally, and re-write the sentence into: "The track was released on 24 May 2013 as the international second single from the album".
 * Does not make grammatical sense.


 * mainstream, anthemic sound -> mainstream and anthemic sound


 * Azalea's second top 20 hit -> Azalea's second top-twenty hit
 * Per MOS:NUM number larger than nine should not be spelled out.


 * peaked at number 13 -> peaked at number-thirteen
 * Per MOS:NUM number larger than nine should not be spelled out.


 * first top 40 hit -> first top-fourty song
 * Per MOS:NUM number larger than nine should not be spelled out.


 * reached number 34 -> reached number thirty-four
 * Per MOS:NUM number larger than nine should not be spelled out.


 * in Mumbai, India -> in Mumbai, India,


 * the video featured -> the video features


 * of festival performances, on The Today Show, and during her first headlining tour, The New Classic Tour (2014). -> of festival performances during The Today Show and her first headlining tour, The New Classic Tour (2014).
 * ✅ rewrote the sentence again.


 * "Bounce" featured on the soundtracks for the 2014 film Vampire Academy and the 2015 film Spy. -> "Bounce" is featured on the soundtracks for the 2014 film Vampire Academy and 2015 film Spy.

Background

 * in early 2013, while she was on tour with Nas in London. -> in early 2013, when she was on tour with Nas in London.


 * Azalea said "Bounce" differed -> Azalea said that "Bounce" is differed
 * does not make grammatical sense

Composition

 * club, trap -> club/ trap
 * see above

Release

 * "Bounce" was premiered -> "Bounce" premiered

Commercial performance

 * number 34 -> number thirty-four
 * Per MOS:NUM number larger than nine should not be spelled out.


 * It marked Azalea's first top 40 hit in Ireland. -> It marks Azalea's first top-fourty hit in Ireland.
 * Per MOS:NUM number larger than nine should not be spelled out.


 * at number eight -> at number-eight
 * Per MOS:NUM the "-" is used for fractions not stand alone numbers


 * at number 13 -> at number-thirteen
 * Per MOS:NUM number larger than nine should not be spelled out.


 * became Azalea's second top 20 hit in the country -> became Azalea's second top-twenty hit in that country
 * Per MOS:NUM number larger than nine should not be spelled out.


 * reached number one -> was a number-one
 * reads awkwardly.

Usage in the media

 * The title should be re-formuled in "Usage in media".


 * The track featured -> The track was featured

Credits and personnel

 * The credits for "Bounce" are adapted from the liner notes of The New Classic. -> Credits for "Bounce" are adapted from the iner notes of The New Classic.

Track listing

 * Digital download – EP -> Digital EP


 * Status: On-hold for seven days.

, if you can implement the changes I have provided in the upper area within 7 days, I will list "Bounce" as a Good Article. Cartoon network freak (talk) 08:14, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks I've addressed everything above.  Cool Marc  12:52, 8 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Note, any notes concerning changes in the presentation of numbers here should be disregarded. Generally, only numbers above nine should be listed in number form, as opposed to letter form.  Azealia 911  talk  09:32, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Additional comments
I've only done a brief check, and it seems to be a nice article. However, when I got to the Composition section, the phrasing seemed odd, so I took a deeper look into the sources, and what I read there left me with some concerns.

The third sentence has the phrase Its production includes "ramping squiggles", but when I check the two sources at the end of that sentence, neither includes the quoted phrase. (Nor does either mention the winding synths or sarangi.) The sixth sentence, about the verses, also has issues: During the verses, her delivery is expletively riddled with trill consonants and American drawl reads strangely, and appears to conflate one source's "no-nonsense, expletive-riddled verses" with the other's quoted lyrics that "Iggy trills with her American-tinged drawl". Worse, the MTV "no-nonsense" quote seems in direct opposition to Digital Spy's "the lyrical content suffers from its pop-friendly sheen", which refers directly to the bridge lyrics being quoted at the end of that sixth sentence. It's clear in the review, though not in the article, that "pop-friendly sheen" is considered a drawback. When the Digital Spy review is used in the Critical response section, "the beats and squiggles have been ramped up to summer anthem level" is turned into the reviewer calling the song itself "a summer anthem". He didn't, really, and the article shouldn't either.

I think the review needs to delve deeper, checking the text against its sourcing, and also taking another look at the prose. For example, the Critical response section should be in past tense, yet there are flashes into the present with "considering", "opining", and the like. There are also sentence fragments that need revising: While Robert Copsey of the same publication wrote that it "felt like a somewhat needless moment of pop frivolity".

One comment on MOS:NUM, from that very section of the Manual of Style: Integers greater than nine expressible in one or two words may be expressed either in numerals or in words. So there is nothing wrong with Top 20, just as there is nothing wrong with "reached number thirty-four" (or "reached number 34"). However, "number-thirteen" is certainly incorrect. So long as the article is consistent in its usage and meets the style requirements, it shouldn't be an issue at GA. (Indeed, only certain sections of the MOS are part of the GA criteria.)

I don't expect it to be difficult to bring the article up to GA status, but more work does need to be done by reviewer and nominator. Best of luck to you both. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:43, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the spot check! I will look into your concerns today. Regarding some of the sourcing mix-ups in the Composition section, I imagine when this was copyedited a while back, references went missing/got mixed up, but I'll get around to fixing all that today! Thanks again.  Cool Marc  04:44, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I've addressed your concerns, "winding synths" has now also been sourced, Sarangi is referring to the "Indian violin" in the Director's Notes source. I'm not quite sure what needs to be revised about Robert Copsey's quote though?  Cool Marc  05:31, 12 September 2015 (UTC)