Talk:Juicy (Doja Cat song)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Benmite (talk · contribs) 22:00, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Hey, queen! Thanks so much for doing the review for "Cry". Thought I should return the favor, so I'm doing this review as per your request. ben ǝʇᴉɯ 22:00, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Overall

 * The article should have its own separate section for the Tyga remix, and all of the information regarding the remix, including anything about the music video, should be moved there

Lead and infobox

 * A separate infobox needs to be made for the solo version of the song, which was released on Amala and not as a single
 * Remove "California" from the parentheses next to the studio names, just put "Los Angeles" with the wikilink
 * Bounce is not sourced anywhere in the article as a genre
 * Release through RCA is not sourced anywhere in the article
 * Saying that it was "released" as a part of the deluxe version of Amala implies that it had its own release, instead write "It was included on..."
 * No need to include that the original was the "solo version"
 * "from her album" → "from her debut studio album"
 * "off her second album" → "from her second studio album"
 * Not fixed
 * "by Doja Cat, along with Lydia Asrat..." → "by Doja Cat, Lydia Asrat..."
 * Include producers in lead
 * "in Australia" → "on the ARIA Charts"
 * "ARIA Charts" should be written in title case
 * Write out that it charted on the Billboard Hot 100, add specific chart position for Billboard Hot 100, remove sentence about US Rhythmic chart but add that the song charted on other Billboard charts
 * Replace "entered charts in the United States" with "reached number 41 on the Billboard Hot 100 and entered charts in..."
 * Move wikilink for Music recording certification to "certified"
 * "is certified" → "was certified"
 * "2x Platinum...Silver...Gold" → "double platinum...silver...gold"

Background and composition

 * Fix WP:REPCITE in both sentences paragraphs
 * Source needed for Dr. Luke as Tyson Trax, use this
 * Wikilink Doja Cat, David Sprecher, and Lukasz Gottwald
 * Remove "told Trey Alston of MTV", just write "stated"
 * Remove "inside her mind", add "in her head" and include that in the quote
 * Trim down quote to just be about how she believed the hook from "Juicy" to be the "greatest hook ever"
 * Would say to be more specific with "make" − produce, write, engineer, master? − but the sourced article doesn't go into more detail, so if you can, find an article that does
 * Remove "Doja Cat added that she was 'proud of it'..." sentence as trivia
 * Include information about the song's composition, otherwise remove "composition" from the section heading

Release and promotion

 * Combine this section with the previous section, change it to "Background, composition, and release"
 * Add wikilink for Amala
 * Information about how the song was released as the lead single from Hot Pink needs to appear here

Music video

 * Better source needed for director credit
 * "...on the same day as the single." → "...on the same day as the single and directed by Jack Begert."
 * "A 'nod to the vibrant..." → "It was compared by Vibe to 'vibrant..." and move this quote to later in the section
 * Not sure how reliable Soulbounce or Femestella are, I would err on the side of caution and remove them and see if you can find more reliable sources that review the video or just leave any critical reception of the video out entirely

Comments
Okay, I see you have concerns about how their should be separate sections for each version of the song. I'm not sure I agree with this as the original vers. of the song has little notability in my opinion. Thoughts: ? versacespace leave a message!  13:28, 24 May 2021 (UTC)


 * pinging again  versacespace  leave a message!  20:53, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Hey, sorry! Somehow missed this the first time. I'm not sure exactly how much information there is out there on the original version of the song compared to the remix, but it's customary for notable versions of a song (remixes, covers, etc.) to be given a separate section in articles instead of having information about them merged with information about the original version. I don't think this is dependent on how notable the original version of the song is compared to any other versions, so long as the original meets WP:GNG and WP:NSONG, but if the original doesn't meet those guidelines, then that's a separate issue. I can ask for a second opinion on this, but for now, I would recommend splitting up the article. It would rid you of the responsibility of having to clarify which version you're talking about every time, which clutters up the article. I also saw that you crossed out some of my suggestions, but you only made changes in response to one of them. There is still no source for bounce as a genre, "solo version" is still there, and it still says it was "released". I'll try to finish making suggestions in the coming week. ben ǝʇᴉɯ  06:33, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Pinging . ben ǝʇᴉɯ  06:33, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I don't think the original is notable. It's the most logical reasoning since an album track from the deluxe version of an album that peaked at #138 is bound to not be notable. Thoughts, ? versacespace  leave a message!  21:35, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the late response. We can come back to this once the review is closer to being done. In any case, another infobox should be included, since the article is still describing two separate versions of the song. ben ǝʇᴉɯ  05:44, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I think that, based on the way the article is set up right now, the article would really benefit from being split up into sections. The "Year-end charts" section is only for the remix, the US and Poland certifications are for the original while the UK certification is for the remix, the music video is only for the remix, three of the live performances are of the original while the first is of the remix, the reviews are all for different versions of the song, and the commercial performance section is only about the remix. Having to clarify which version is being talked about each time makes the article harder to read. ben ǝʇᴉɯ  05:30, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
 * hi! I made the article as I envision it to look the way you requested, but I didn't want to make such a large change without looking at it with you, so I have the updated article at User:VersaceSpace/juicy overhaul, would you like to check it to find any mistakes? versacespace  leave a message!  21:22, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hey, sorry! I've been kind of MIA on here for a bit. I think the draft looks good as a start, save for a few things. The Late Night with Seth Meyers performance should be moved to the remix section. Everything from "Erin Bashford of..." to "...28,000 US streaming equivalent units (4.2 million streams)" should also be moved underneath the remix header, since all of that is referring to the remix, and the "Credits and personnel" section should also only appear in the remix section. It should also be made clear throughout that Tyga is a main artist, not a featured artist, on the remix, so change "featuring American rapper Tyga" to "with American rapper Tyga". ben ǝʇᴉɯ  18:03, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Other comments
I know that Benmite is doing the best he can right now given the state of this article, so I will leave him to do that. However, for the nominator, it would be definitional to add the sources given on top of the talk page to improve the article. Cheers, MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 09:04, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Status query
Benmite, VersaceSpace, where does this review stand? As far as I can tell, VersaceSpace has not edited the nominated article for over three months nor worked on the "overhaul" version for over two months (nor updated the article with the overhaul). The review has been open for nearly four months, and if progress isn't made soon, it should probably be closed. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:08, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * seeing no response, even though Benmite has made a number of contributions since you pinged. I agree on closing it to free the backlog up. can resubmit the nomination once they've worked on the comments IMHO.  A. C. Santacruz  &#8258;  Talk  23:28, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
 * A._C._Santacruz, we typically allow at least a full seven days after notification before taking the next step. I hope that Benmite will stop by before then and take action here. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:11, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Failure
Hi there,. I've decided that, due to the lack of activity on your part on the page to make the necessary changes, I'm going to have to fail this as a GA. When you start regularly editing Wikipedia again, you can nominate the page again and we can start where we left off, or someone else can if they beat me to it. ben ǝʇᴉɯ 04:19, 20 September 2021 (UTC)