Talk:GBI (German Bold Italic)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Cukie Gherkin (talk · contribs) 07:05, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Images


 * 1) No fair use images, neat

References


 * 1) References seem to be formatted and organized really nicely; unless I'm overlooking something, does not seem to use any low-quality sources. Will do a spotcheck after reviewing the article itself.

Lead


 * 1) Changed 'has little success' to 'had little success'
 * 2) Otherwise, lead seems solid (will come 'round back if it seems like a vital aspect of the article is absent from the summary)

Infobox


 * 1) All details important for the infobox appear to be present, and vice versa with the article

Background and production


 * 1) All good

Composition


 * 1) Seems fine, though if I may ask, which source is being used to say that she "seductively reads her line"?
 * I changed "seductively reads her line" -> "seductively talks" (per Independent: "... features Minogue talking and giggling over a minimalist house rhythm") Damian Vo (talk) 07:54, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Release and remixes


 * 1) All good

Reception


 * 1) Is there anything that you feel may be gained by expanding the reception provided by Priya Elan?
 * Sadly the author only mentioned it as one of Kylie's most interesting yet lesser-known collabs Damian Vo (talk) 07:54, 3 February 2024 (UTC)


 * 1) I tweaked 'has' to 'had' again, as the arguments made for its lack of commercial success are all past tense

Production and synopsis


 * 1) All good, although I think that the following line about it not being released fits better here than in the following section.

Reception and analysis


 * 1) All good

Aftermath


 * 1) I feel it may be a little redundant to say "has made several..." and "has worn traditional..." maybe change it to "where she wore"
 * Fixed

Comments


 * 1) Will finish tomorrow, too dang tired. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 07:45, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) Done reviewing the text, will do a spotcheck soon. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 16:50, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Reviewed the following:


 * 1)
 * 2)
 * 3)
 * 4)

I'm comfortable that these sources indicate the article is accurately citing external sites. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 01:48, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for picking this up for a review. I almost forgot I nominated this article back in June. I fixed all of the issues you mentioned above. Please let me know if you have any more questions Damian Vo (talk) 07:54, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
 * No problem. Good job on the article and the (very few) changes! - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 00:48, 5 February 2024 (UTC)