Talk:Decisions (song)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Seabuckthorn (talk · contribs) 18:59, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Nominator: WikiRedactor (talk)

Hi! My review for this article will be here shortly. -- Seabuckthorn   ♥  18:59, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

1: Well-written
 * a. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
 * b. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

Check for WP:LEAD:


 * 1) Check for Correct Structure of Lead Section:  ✅
 * 2) Check for Citations (WP:LEADCITE):  ✅
 * 3) Check for Introductory text:  ✅
 * 4) * Check for Provide an accessible overview (MOS:INTRO): ✅
 * 5) ** Major Point 1: Background and composition "It was independently released through online music stores on July 10, 2012 with its accompanying remixes extended play (EP); it was released as a stand-alone track on February 8, 2013. Cyrus' inclusion on the song was initially not publicized, with the intention for of it making its own impact separate from her reputation, although Cyrus later confirmed the collaboration. "Decisions" is an electronic dance music (EDM) and dubstep track that lyrically discusses the general desire for wealth and success, frequently mentioned as "bitches love cake" during the track." (summarised well in the lead)
 * 6) ** Major Point 2: Critical reception "Upon its release, the track received generally favorable reviews from music critics, who appreciated Cyrus' inclusion and its diversity from her earlier works, but were ambivalent towards its overall production." (summarised well in the lead)
 * 7) ** Major Point 3: Music video "An accompanying music video for the song was filmed in Los Angeles, California and was released on November 1, 2012." (summarised well in the lead)
 * 8) ** Major Point 4: Live performance "" ( not in the lead, do you think it should be mentioned? I’m not sure. )
 * 9) ** Major Point 5: Parody "The original version failed to chart on any national record charts, although the parody "Hunger Games" by TheBajanCanadian peaked at number 38 on the U.S. Billboard Dance/Electronic Songs chart." (summarised well in the lead)
 * 10) * Check for Relative emphasis: ✅
 * 11) ** Major Point 1: Background and composition "It was independently released through online music stores on July 10, 2012 with its accompanying remixes extended play (EP); it was released as a stand-alone track on February 8, 2013. Cyrus' inclusion on the song was initially not publicized, with the intention for of it making its own impact separate from her reputation, although Cyrus later confirmed the collaboration. "Decisions" is an electronic dance music (EDM) and dubstep track that lyrically discusses the general desire for wealth and success, frequently mentioned as "bitches love cake" during the track." (the lead gives due weight as is given in the body)
 * 12) ** Major Point 2: Critical reception "Upon its release, the track received generally favorable reviews from music critics, who appreciated Cyrus' inclusion and its diversity from her earlier works, but were ambivalent towards its overall production." (the lead gives due weight as is given in the body)
 * 13) ** Major Point 3: Music video "An accompanying music video for the song was filmed in Los Angeles, California and was released on November 1, 2012." (the lead gives due weight as is given in the body)
 * 14) ** Major Point 4: Live performance "" ( not in the lead, do you think it should be mentioned? I’m not sure. )
 * 15) ** Major Point 5: Parody "The original version failed to chart on any national record charts, although the parody "Hunger Games" by TheBajanCanadian peaked at number 38 on the U.S. Billboard Dance/Electronic Songs chart." (the lead gives due weight as is given in the body)
 * 16) * Check for Opening paragraph (MOS:BEGIN): ✅
 * 17) ** Check for First sentence (WP:LEADSENTENCE): ✅
 * 18) *** "Decisions" is a song by Israeli record producer Borgore featuring American recording artist Miley Cyrus.
 * 19) ** Check for Format of the first sentence (MOS:BOLDTITLE): ✅
 * 20) ** Check for Proper names and titles: ✅
 * 21) ** Check for Abbreviations and synonyms (MOS:BOLDSYN): None
 * 22) ** Check for Foreign language (MOS:FORLANG): None
 * 23) ** Check for Pronunciation: None
 * 24) ** Check for Contextual links (MOS:CONTEXTLINK): ✅
 * 25) ** Check for Biographies: NA
 * 26) ** Check for Organisms: NA
 * 27) Check for Biographies of living persons:  NA
 * 28) Check for Alternative names (MOS:LEADALT):  ✅
 * 29) * Check for Non-English titles:
 * 30) * Check for Usage in first sentence:
 * 31) * Check for Separate section usage:
 * 32) Check for Length (WP:LEADLENGTH):  ✅
 * 33) Check for Clutter (WP:LEADCLUTTER):  None

✅

Check for WP:LAYOUT: ✅


 * 1) Check for Body sections: WP:BODY, MOS:BODY.  ✅
 * 2) * Check for Headings and sections: ✅
 * 3) * Check for Section templates and summary style: ✅
 * 4) * Check for Paragraphs (MOS:PARAGRAPHS): ✅
 * 5) ** Short paragraphs and single sentences generally do not warrant their own subheading (WP:BETTER)
 * 6) ** Can sections "Live performance" and "Parody" be merged? The paragraphs are too short.
 * 7) Check for Standard appendices and footers (MOS:APPENDIX):  ✅
 * 8) * Check for Order of sections (WP:ORDER): ✅
 * 9) * Check for Works or publications: ✅
 * 10) * Check for See also section (MOS:SEEALSO): ✅
 * 11) * Check for Notes and references (WP:FNNR): ✅
 * 12) * Check for Further reading (WP:FURTHER): ✅
 * 13) * Check for External links (WP:LAYOUTEL): ✅
 * 14) * Check for Links to sister projects: ✅
 * 15) * Check for Navigation templates: ✅
 * 16) Check for Formatting:  ✅
 * 17) * Check for Images (WP:LAYIM): ✅
 * 18) * Check for Links: ✅
 * 19) * Check for Horizontal rule (WP:LINE): ✅

✅

Check for WP:WTW: ✅


 * 1) Check for Words that may introduce bias:  ✅
 * 2) * Check for Puffery (WP:PEA): ✅
 * 3) * Check for Contentious labels (WP:LABEL): ✅
 * 4) * Check for Unsupported attributions (WP:WEASEL): ✅
 * 5) * Check for Expressions of doubt (WP:ALLEGED): ✅
 * 6) * Check for Editorializing (MOS:OPED): ✅
 * 7) * Check for Synonyms for said (WP:SAY): ✅
 * 8) Check for Expressions that lack precision:  ✅
 * 9) * Check for Euphemisms (WP:EUPHEMISM): ✅
 * 10) * Check for Clichés and idioms (WP:IDIOM): ✅
 * 11) * Check for Relative time references (WP:REALTIME): ✅
 * 12) * Check for Neologisms (WP:PEA): None
 * 13) Check for Offensive material (WP:F***):  ✅

Check for WP:MOSFICT: ✅


 * 1) Check for Real-world perspective (WP:Real world):  ✅
 * 2) * Check for Primary and secondary information (WP:PASI): ✅
 * 3) * Check for Contextual presentation (MOS:PLOT): ✅

✅


 * Prose is preferred over list (WP:PROSE):
 * Check for Tables (MOS:TABLES):

2: Verifiable with no original research
 * a. Has an appropriate reference section: Yes
 * b. Citation to reliable sources where necessary: excellent (Thorough check on Google. Cross-checked with the other FA – Fijación Oral, Vol. 1)

✅

Check for WP:RS: ✅


 * 1) Check for the material (WP:RSVETTING):  (not contentious) ✅
 * 2) * Is it contentious?: No
 * 3) * Does the ref indeed support the material?:
 * 4) Check for the author (WP:RSVETTING):  ✅
 * 5) * Who is the author?:
 * 6) * Does the author have a Wikipedia article?:
 * 7) * What are the author's academic credentials and professional experience?:
 * 8) * What else has the author published?:
 * 9) * Is the author, or this work, cited in other reliable sources? In academic works?:
 * 10) Check for the publication (WP:RSVETTING):  ✅
 * 11) Check for Self-published sources (WP:SPS):

✅

Check for inline citations WP:MINREF: ✅


 * 1) Check for Direct quotations:  ✅
 * 2) Check for Likely to be challenged:  ✅
 * 3) Check for Contentious material about living persons (WP:BLP):  NA


 * c. No original research: ✅

✅


 * 1) Check for primary sources (WP:PRIMARY):  ✅
 * 2) Check for synthesis (WP:SYN):  ✅
 * 3) Check for original images (WP:OI):  ✅

3: Broad in its coverage

✅

Thorough check on Google in parallel with criteria 2. Cross-checked with the other FA – Fijación Oral, Vol. 1


 * 1) Check for Article scope as defined by reliable sources:
 * 2) Check for The extent of the subject matter in these RS:
 * 3) Check for Out of scope:
 * 4) Check for The range of material that belongs in the article:
 * 5) Check for All material that is notable is covered:
 * 6) Check for All material that is referenced is covered:
 * 7) Check for All material that a reader would be likely to agree matches the specified scope is covered:
 * 8) Check for The most general scope that summarises essentially all knowledge:
 * 9) Check for Stay on topic and no wandering off-topic (WP:OFFTOPIC):

✅


 * 1) Check for Readability issues (WP:LENGTH):
 * 2) Check for Article size (WP:TOO LONG!):

4: Neutral

✅

4. Fair representation without bias: ✅


 * 1) Check for POV (WP:YESPOV):  ✅
 * 2) Check for naming (WP:POVNAMING):  ✅
 * 3) Check for structure (WP:STRUCTURE):  ✅
 * 4) Check for Due and undue weight (WP:DUE):  ✅
 * 5) Check for Balancing aspects (WP:BALASPS):  ✅
 * 6) Check for Giving "equal validity" (WP:VALID):  ✅
 * 7) Check for Balance (WP:YESPOV):  ✅
 * 8) Check for Impartial tone (WP:IMPARTIAL):  ✅
 * 9) Check for Describing aesthetic opinions (WP:SUBJECTIVE):  ✅
 * 10) Check for Words to watch (WP:YESPOV):  ✅
 * 11) Check for Attributing and specifying biased statements (WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV):  ✅
 * 12) Check for Fringe theories and pseudoscience (WP:PSCI):  None
 * 13) Check for Religion (WP:RNPOV):  None

5: Stable: No edit wars, etc: Yes

6: Images ✅ (NFC with a valid FUR) & (Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license)

✅

6: Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: ✅


 * 1) Check for copyright tags (WP:TAGS):  ✅
 * 2) Check for copyright status:  ✅
 * 3) Check for non-free content (WP:NFC):  ✅
 * 4) Check for valid fair use rationales (WP:FUR):  ✅

6: Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: ✅


 * 1) Check for image relevance (WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE):  ✅
 * 2) Check for Images for the lead (WP:LEADIMAGE):  ✅
 * 3) Check for suitable captions (WP:CAPTION):  ✅

I'm glad to see your work here. I do have some insights based on the above checklist that I think will improve the article :
 * I think the lead can be improved in order to provide an accessible overview and to give relative emphasis.
 * I think the layout needs to be fixed.

Besides that, I think the article looks excellent. WikiRedactor, please feel free to strike out any recommendation from this review which you think will not help in improving the article which is our main aim here. All the best, --  Seabuckthorn   ♥  23:13, 18 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your review! I was a little hesitant to merge the live performance and parody information into a "Live performance and parody" section because they are so unrelated, although I moved both sections' information into a single paragraph under "Background and composition". If you're not really feeling this arrangement, I'll go ahead and create a separate section. I also added a mention of the live performance in the introduction. If there are any other adjustments you'd like made to the article, I'll be more than happy to make them! WikiRedactor (talk) 23:22, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks! The article looks perfect now. And to be honest, I wanted exactly this modification but was a bit hesitant to suggest in my review because it involved removal of two sections, so thanks a lot! Thanks, WikiRedactor, very much for your diligence, care and precision in writing such great articles.  --  Seabuckthorn   ♥  22:57, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Promoting the article to GA status. -- Seabuckthorn   ♥  22:57, 19 February 2014 (UTC)