Talk:Living in a Ghost Town/GA1

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

Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 05:45, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Nice to see such a recently released song in the nominations list; I will review this soon! --K. Peake 05:45, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Infobox and lead

 * Change recorded date to 2019–2020 in the infobox
 * ❌ Why would this be better?
 * Because not only is the exact date of the months not fully sourced, but it was recorded between 2019 and 20. --K. Peake 06:56, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ Excellent point.


 * Where are the studios sourced from? If it is part of the credits/personnel, then add that to the section.
 * ✅ Removed as unsourced.


 * Remove wikilink on Matt Clifford since his article does not exist
 * ❌ Valid WP:REDLINK


 * Target The Glimmer Twins to Jagger–Richards


 * Remove [1] from the infobox since you do not add refs; however, I notice that The Glimmer Twins are the only producers not included in the personnel; mistake here?
 * ✅ Matt Clifford was not sourced but the personnel section explicitly says that Jagger and Richards produced the song.


 * Link to the music video on YouTube
 * ❌ I am not going to link someone to Google's surveillance network. Why would I do that?
 * There is literally a template for embedding music videos in infoboxes, look through so many GAs and you will see it. --K. Peake 06:56, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I know there is. I'm not going to add that.
 * See Template:Infobox song --K. Peake 09:52, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Nothing there says that music video links are obligatory and certainly nothing about YouTube. I am not going to add a link to YouTube: why are you insisting on this?


 * The lead is currently too short since it is missing a good amount of information such as the genres of the song and chart performance; I will order how to add this appropriately below and it should be two paragraphs instead of one para.
 * The second sentence should instead be "The song was produced by..." but this needs to be written out in the first section since the sources are there for it
 * ❌ I don't understand you.
 * I mean to write out who the song's producers are in prose --K. Peake 06:56, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think that needs to be in the lead, especially since there isn't any running text about Don Was.
 * The lead is currently too short, that's the issue --K. Peake 09:52, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * It now covers some material about every section below.


 * "released on 23 April 2020 through" → "released for digital download and streaming as a single on 23 April 2020, through" with the appropriate targets


 * "making it the first Rolling Stones single" → "This made the song the Rolling Stones' first single" with this being a new sentence instead
 * Should not be part of the sentence and do not have too many uses of it --K. Peake 06:56, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't understand you. If this is a small thing, please just amend it yourself.
 * ✅ --K. Peake 09:52, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ --K. Peake 09:52, 11 October 2020 (UTC)


 * The four year statement in this sentence is not sourced in the body; fix this


 * You should follow this with a new sentence about the genres of the song and add lyrics information if you can sourced that in the body first


 * Start a new para here and the opening sentence should start as ""Living in a Ghost Town" was recorded during..." since this should not only come before the critical reception, but should be a different sentence
 * This is how things are supposed to be ordered --K. Peake 06:56, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Source?
 * Well think about it, the lead has things ordered in a very similar way to the order of sections and recording obviously comes before reception --K. Peake 09:52, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Rearranged
 * Rearranged


 * "for a forthcoming studio album that the band has been working on since 2015." → "of the Rolling Stones in 2019, ultimately being finished the following year."
 * ❌ I don't understand you.
 * I mean to change that part of the sentence --K. Peake 06:56, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Again, if this is some small thing, I can't understand what you want: just change it yourself.
 * ✅ --K. Peake 15:05, 11 October 2020 (UTC)


 * "The song has received positive reviews from critics" → "The song received generally positive reviews from music critics" with the appropriate target and add what was praised/commented on


 * The following sentence should mention some of the notable chart positions of the song
 * ❌ this is arbitrary
 * No it is not, since the lead is too short currently --K. Peake 07:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Saying that the lead is short is one thing but the remedy is not to insert original research.
 * I literally never said that... --K. Peake 09:52, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * What are objectively "notable chart positions"? This is the point I'm making.


 * Last sentence of this para should be about the accompanying music video

Recording and composition

 * Retitle to Background and composition
 * ❌ No need
 * This is more about background on the song than recording, though they are very similar so change to background and composition --K. Peake 07:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I disagree. If this matters so much, someone else can change it.


 * "Since 2017, the band had been" → "Since 2017, the Rolling Stones had been"


 * "but had to stop" → "but had to stop touring in 2020"


 * "to raise money" → "helping raise money"


 * "during the crisis." → "during the pandemic."
 * ❌: overuse of the word "pandemic"; no need to repeat it over and over again


 * "On 23 April, the band released 'Living in a Ghost Town' online." → "On 23 April of that year, the band released "Living in a Ghost Town" as a single." with the target
 * ❌ I have no clue why you keep writing "with the target"...?
 * When I write "the target", that refers to directing word(s) to a certain Wikipedia page --K. Peake 07:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * That makes less sense: what are "directing words"?
 * I mean the words being DIRECTED to a Wikipedia article, it is like a wikilink basically. This should not be hard to understand... --K. Peake 09:47, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Sometimes you include this language and sometimes you just write "finished remotely and is their" → "finished remotely, marking their" so that makes it confusing. I have never seen anyone refer to "directing words" in Wikipedia.


 * "finished remotely and is their" → "finished remotely, marking their"


 * "Jagger claims to have" → "Mick Jagger, a founder member of the Rolling Stones, claimed to have" with the appropriate wikilink
 * ✅ mostly


 * "to social distancing as a method" → "to social distancing, which has been used as a method"


 * "being a ghost existing after" → "being a ghost after"


 * "labeled 'Living in a Ghost Town' as" → "labeled "Living in a Ghost Town" as"
 * ❌ this is written in British English
 * You are supposed to use the same speech marks ("") in British English --K. Peake 07:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Quotation_mark


 * "'gentle blues-rock number'." → ""gentle blues-rock number"."
 * ❌ en-GB


 * "'a slow-paced chug with a tint of reggae'," → ""a slow-paced chug with a tint of reggae","
 * ❌ en-GB


 * "Alexis Petridis of The Guardian" → "Alexis Petridis from The Guardian"


 * "'vintage reggae flavour' in" → ""vintage reggae flavour" to"
 * ❌ en-GB


 * "'stabbing, echoing organ'," → ""stabbing, echoing organ"," with the target
 * ❌ en-GB, common term


 * Target Louder Sound to Metal Hammer
 * ❌ Valid redirect.
 * It does not meet MOS:LINK2SECT, since it is a redirect to a main article so I am disputing you here --K. Peake 07:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * It's not under the "Metal Hammer" brand or at that domain name.
 * You are supposed to have it directed to the non-redirect... --K. Peake 09:47, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Does WP:TARGET say that? Where are you getting this?


 * "calling it 'a relaxed piece of reggae-infused rock'." → "called it "a relaxed piece of reggae-infused rock"." with the target
 * ❌ everyone is familiar with rock music and adding links inside of quotations is discouraged
 * It is fine in this context and genres are supposed to be targeted to themselves --K. Peake 07:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Again, "rock" is a very common term.
 * In the context of it being the specific genre, this target is appropriate --K. Peake 09:48, 11 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Add some info about the lyrical content of the song after this genre description
 * ❌ There already is some, I don't have anything else sourced to add here.

Release and reception

 * "The initial release was digital-only, accompanied" → "The song was initially released for digital download and streaming as a single on 23 April 2020, being accompanied"


 * Wikilink music video


 * "with footage taken from across the world of empty city streets." → "with footage of empty city streets that was taken from across the world."


 * "The band have plans to resume No Filter once the pandemic subsides" → "Once the pandemic subsides, the Rolling Stones plan to resume the No Filter Tour"


 * "the single is a means of keeping" → "the single was done to keep"
 * ❌ This is less clear: it's the release not the "doing" of the single that is relevant.


 * "promoting the album's worth of new material" → "for promotion of their upcoming album"


 * "and purple vinyl single exclusive" → "and purple vinyl, both of which are exclusive" with the target


 * "online store and an orange vinyl single for" → "online store, and an orange vinyl for sale by"


 * Are you sure the releases are still forthcoming since they are apparently out now?
 * No.
 * Make sure this is updated in prose then --K. Peake 07:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)


 * "Writing in The Guardian, Alexis Petridis gave" → "Petridis rewarded"


 * "it 'their best new song in years', with" → "it the Rolling Stones' "best new song in years", placing"


 * Remove wikilink on reggae


 * "Writing for The Irish Times, Will Hodginkson of The Times gave" → "Hodginkson gave"


 * "that the pacing and mood" → "that the song's pacing and mood"


 * "of being in lockdown." → "of being in lockdown during the pandemic."


 * "agrees that the single" → "opined that the single"


 * "'right on time'" → ""right on time","
 * ❌ en-GB


 * The NME review should come last in this para since it is the most critical review
 * ❌ How does that make sense?
 * Because reviews come in order from most positive to most negative if it is generally positive, or the other way around if generally negative --K. Peake 07:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Source?
 * Copyediting reception sections --K. Peake 09:46, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * This is an essay, there is nothing normative here.


 * "a 'a rushed and half-baked comment on our current predicament'," → ""a rushed and half-baked comment on our current predicament","
 * ❌ en-GB


 * "as 'Jagger perhaps doesn’t" → "noting that "Jagger perhaps doesn't"
 * ❌ en-GB


 * "fishnet safety packages'." → "fishnet safety packages"."
 * ❌ en-GB


 * "of the week and" → "of the week, and"
 * The comma is needed here grammatically --K. Peake 07:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Good point: sorry for that.
 * Good point: sorry for that.


 * "recommended this track." → "recommended the track."
 * It is more encyclopaedic to write "the track" --K. Peake 07:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I disagree but my reasoning above was faulty again.
 * I disagree but my reasoning above was faulty again.


 * "Announcing the release for Stereogum, Tom Breihan" → "For Stereogum, Tom Breihan"


 * "but it 'rocks harder" → "but "rocks harder"
 * The word "it" is not needed here --K. Peake 07:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Wow. Again, I was just wrong.
 * Wow. Again, I was just wrong.


 * "song to rock'." → "song to rock"."
 * ❌ en-GB


 * "On 3 July," → "On 3 July 2020,"


 * Target German singles chart to GfK Entertainment charts


 * "after the song was released on vinyl in several different special editions," → "after several different special editions were released for the song,"


 * "on this chart and the artist with the" → "on the chart and giving them the"


 * "after "Jumpin' Jack Flash" reached" → "following on from "Jumpin' Jack Flash" reaching"


 * "than in the past few weeks" → "than they were for the past few weeks"


 * "in the German Charts is purely sales-dependent and does" → "for the German Charts being purely sales-dependent; it does"


 * Add more chart positions that are notable here, such as Scotland and Hungary
 * ❌ How are some "more notable"? Where is any narrative text about the Hungarian charts?
 * No, but you can write out in prose about the song reaching positions on charts --K. Peake 07:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * That's redundant and doesn't give any meaningful context. The German charts one does but I don't have any for the Hungarian charts.
 * The chart positions are obviously notable when they are a high ranking, this should be clear --K. Peake 09:46, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * There's still nothing to write.

Personnel

 * Where are the studios?
 * ❌ I don't know and studios aren't persons


 * There is no source for the Rolling Stones credits; add at the top of the section "Credits adapted from..." and then provide the appropriate source there


 * Where are the mentions of the Glimmer Twins members?


 * Remove redundant wikilinks
 * ❌: it's fine to link to someone's name in a list; otherwise, the list would look unbalanced


 * Target engineering to Audio engineer

Charts

 * Chart performance for 'Living in a Ghost Town' → Chart performance for "Living in a Ghost Town"
 * ❌ en-GB


 * Remove Adult Alternative Songs per WP:USCHARTS

Release history

 * Release formats for 'Living in a Ghost Town' → Release dates and formats for "Living in a Ghost Town"


 * The region col is missing, which should be the first one
 * ❌ "Missing"? "Should"? Based on what?
 * This is how release history tables are supposed to be laid out, look through many GAs and you will see this; it is important to list where the releases were --K. Peake 07:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Source?
 * Look at the release tables throughout articles; it looks messy in the state you currently have but needs fixing --K. Peake 09:43, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * There is nothing messy about this table. Adding a useless column would make it more messy.


 * Ref col is missing too, which should be the one after the label col
 * ❌ That is ugly, unnecessary, less accessible and I will never do that: the rows are properly sourced.
 * This is outdated format that you are using now, though --K. Peake 07:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Format → Format(s)
 * There are multiple formats in the same rows so this must be done --K. Peake 07:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Source?
 * Source?


 * Formats for the first release should be Digital download and streaming, with the targets


 * 10″ vinyl single → 10" vinyl, with the target
 * It is not currently written correctly --K. Peake 07:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I copied and pasted what you wrote above.
 * I copied and pasted what you wrote above.


 * Make sure the appropriate refs are invoked in the col
 * ❌ What are you talking about? There is nothing to be references in "in the col"???
 * This is for when you have adding the col --K. Peake 07:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I can't even parse that sentence. What are you talking about "when you have adding the col"? I sincerely can't even read that.
 * Col means column in a table, I thought this was an obvious abbreviation --K. Peake 09:43, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I realize that "col" means "column": "when you have adding the column" is nonsense. What does "when you have adding the column" mean?

Final comments and verdict

 * after I finished my comments today easily just like I set out to do, hopefully this can become a GA on this very day and I understand the numerous mistakes since you are not a heavily experienced editor! --K. Peake 11:35, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , ..."not a heavily experienced editor"...? ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:06, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * It looks like you do not have much experience in GANs, that was not meant as a diss. And I have made responses to your comments above. --K. Peake 06:56, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , I didn't think you were being disrespectful: it is just one of many things that is unintelligible to me on this page. Responded myself, including several changes. Thanks. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:24, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry but I am going to have to ❌ this article because not only has it been on hold for too long, but you have not implemented numerous changes properly even after I have gone through them on the review page. --K. Peake 08:15, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , Well, you left several items above outstanding. It's unfortunate that you think that this article can't be good without a link to YouTube but I'm never going to include that, so c'est la vie. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:18, 13 October 2020 (UTC)