Talk:Breakaway (Kelly Clarkson album)/GA1

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

Reviewer: WikiRedactor (talk · contribs) 19:23, 4 January 2014 (UTC)


 * General
 * Please correct these external links.
 * Done.


 * I recommend making "Critical reception" and "Commercial performance" their own headings, and placing "Accolades" as a subheading under "Critical reception".
 * Done.


 * I suggest renaming "Peak positions" as "Weekly charts", as it seems to be a fairly standard naming convention across album articles.
 * Done. BUT I worry that some editors might just add another entry of the SAME chart set in a different year since the album still charts occasionally. (e.g. the "Bring Me to Life" article.)
 * Oh, I see what you mean. If you want to go ahead and change it back, that'll be fine!


 * The succession box in "External links" is unnecessary; the link you provide to Grammy Award for Best Pop Vocal Album is fine on its own.
 * Done.


 * Introduction
 * Please wikilink "studio album".
 * Done.


 * I think you should break the introduction up into three main paragraphs, the first being the overview and genre information, the second being critical and commercial performance, and the third being singles and tours.
 * Done. Please check.
 * Looks good to me!


 * "...and were also critical of her attaining a commercial appeal on her own." I suggest rewriting this as "... and were also critical of her attempts of establishing a commercial appeal on her own."
 * Done.


 * "Predominantly a pop rock album, the music of Breakaway which developed from rock and soul influences marked as a departure from the R&B-oriented sound of Thankful; with its lyrical content exploring themes of heartbreak, love, and escapism." I suggest rewriting this as "Breakaway is predominately a pop rock album with elements of rock and soul music, marking a departure from the R&B-oriented sound of Thankful; its lyrics explore themes of heartbreak, love, and escapism."
 * Done.


 * "It merited considerations for several industry awards, such as winning two Grammy Awards and receiving a nomination for a Juno Award." I suggest rewriting this as "It received several awards and nominations, including winning two Grammy Awards and receiving a nomination for a Juno Award."
 * Done.


 * You mention the 15 million copies sold later in the article, so you can remove the reference up here.
 * Done. Though I added it back then because it might be a subject of contest
 * That's fine!


 * When dealing with simple numbers (number 3, 6 million copies, etc.) I think you should write the numbers out. 10+ can be written with digits. (This applies throughout the article, as well.)
 * Done. But please check.
 * I made some tiny adjustments, but you got most of them already!


 * "The success of its singles prompted Billboard to credit her for landscaping the core sound of mainstream pop music to an uptempo dance-oriented sound in the 2000s." I suggest rewriting this as "Their successes prompted Billboard to credit her for landscaping the core sound of mainstream pop music as an uptempo dance-oriented sound in the 2000s."
 * Done.


 * Background
 * This paragraph can be merged with "Development and production" and renamed "Background and production".
 * Done.


 * I'd also like to see a picture added in this area to spruce it up a bit, maybe one of Avril or Whitney?
 * Done.


 * All of this stuff mentioned in the section already happened; please replace all instances of "will" and "is" with a more suitable verb. (This applies throughout the article, as well.)
 * Done. But please check.
 * I made a couple small changes.


 * Can we find replacement words for stuff like "overjoyed" and "hated"? I'm not feeling an encyclopedic tone from that kind of language.
 * Done. But please check, because I replaced them with ecstatic, detested and disliked.
 * That sounds better to me.


 * Composition
 * Some song samples would fit nicely in here.
 * Done.


 * For songs that have their own articles, can you provide wikilinks to them in this section?
 * I already added the links in the background and production section. Would that be an overlink?
 * I didn't even pick up on that, thanks for pointing it out! So yeah, the way it is right now will be fine.


 * The source talking about "Breakaway" ("People didn't even know it was me!") links to an incorrect website.
 * Done. Fixed the source.


 * Singles
 * What exactly do you meaning by "outpacing" other songs?
 * Billboard reported that the number 2-peaking single "Since U Been Gone" was more successful on the Billboard Hot 100 than the number 1 singles "A Moment Like This", "My Life Would Suck Without You" and "Stronger (What Doesn't Kill You)".
 * Okay.


 * When talking about The Princess Diaries 2, it should say in July 2004.
 * Done.


 * Critical reception
 * Is there a Metascore for this album that you can provide us with?
 * Done. Weirdly, Breakaway is the only Kelly Clarkson album not to be aggregated by Metacritic.


 * This sections seems to be a bit quote-farmish, I suggest paraphrasing some of the quotes that the give.
 * Done. But please check.
 * That looks much better now.


 * Commercial performance
 * Just to break it up a little bit, you can replace some uses of "the album" with "the record", "the project", or Breakaway.
 * Done. But please check.
 * Looks good!


 * Leagacy
 * There is no source provided for the Tokyo Police Club mention.
 * Done. Added one.


 * Track listing
 * For the track listing itself, Amazon.com is fine, but I think you should include the liner notes as well for the actual credits.
 * Done.


 * Year-end charts
 * The French, Hungarian, Mexican, and UK links are not working.
 * Done. But the French one is currently down and might be on closed access at the moment. I think it's because of the wrong scripting of the official SNEP website, the whole 2006 annual chart had a wrong scripting except for the top 22 in the singles chart. But it's the official one and I can't find a backup for it unless SNEP revamps their site. It used to be there, though.
 * I tried looking for an archive too, but that whole system is really messed up. All the other citations have been solid, so I'll trust that this was once working, but if we could periodically check in and see if SNEP made any fixes I would appreciate it.


 * Decade-end charts
 * The UK and US links are not working.
 * Done. But the UK decade end chart is closed access, though. I only got it from the FA-approved List of best-selling albums of the 2000s in the United Kingdom article.
 * Okay!


 * Certifications
 * The Mexican certification is not listed in the source.
 * Done. I merged it to the Mexican year end citation.


 * The Netherlands reference appears to be a harmful website (at least according to my computer.)
 * Done. I think it's because of the problems of the Template:Certification Table Entry and the IFPI website (which was revamped into NVPI lately). I inserted a official NVPI database, but unfortunately it only shows the 2008 certifications. Like the SNEP in France, there is something wrong in the NVPI website, too. But the ID number is there, though.
 * Okay, same as above; we can check in every now and then to see if any fixes to the site were made.

Overall, a solid article! I spot-checked several references along the way, and aside from the ones I've mentioned above, everything was in order. I'll check in with you after these corrections are addressed. WikiRedactor (talk) 20:34, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
 * All in all, I fixed almost everything in the article based on your comments, I'm just having trouble finding an stable source for the French Year-End chart source and the Dutch certification source other than the botched official ones (a predicament currently shared with all 2006 year-end charting/certified albums). But other than that, everything's working fine. Please check, though. Thanks for your review! Chihciboy (talk) 09:12, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm pleased with the corrections made, and the minor ones that were beyond our control will certainly not made or break the article. I'm going to go ahead and pass the article, congratulations! WikiRedactor (talk) 17:04, 5 January 2014 (UTC)