Talk:Sea of Voices/GA1

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

Nominator: 02:07, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Skyshifter (talk · contribs) 16:40, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Yes. Skyshifter  talk  16:40, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Infobox and lead
 * 2014 recording year is unsourced & not mentioned in the article
 * ✅ —TS
 * The same above applies to "Dream pop" and "synth-pop"
 * ✅, and added one sourced genre. —TS
 * Robinson said he took inspiration from "Sea of Voices" for "Unfold", not Nurture as a whole; change Nurture to "Unfold".
 * ✅ —TS

Background and composition
 * I don't think the "further information" template is needed; this article already presents enough information that is very similar to the one found in Worlds. At very least, "Porter Robinson § Career" should be removed for being too broad.
 * ✅ both. —TS
 * "... he gravitated towards "sweeter, cuter, [and] more feminine" voices when writing Worlds (2014), originally using the Vocaloid voice Avanna ..." This sentence mixes general Worlds information with "Sea of Voices" specific info. I'd recommend splitting these two sentences.
 * I'm not seeing why this is a problem, as I would assume any approaches he mentions using for the album as a whole would also apply to individual songs until mentioned otherwise. To my knowledge, I'm also not synthesizing the sources or saying anything that isn't already being said. —TS
 * There is no problem with the sources or anything. I was just confused when reading for the first time because when reading, it first read as if Robinson used Avanna for Worlds, not "Sea of Voices". Here is a possible different way to write this part:
 * "According to him, he gravitated towards "sweeter, cuter, [and] more feminine" voices when writing Worlds (2014). For that reason, he originally used the Vocaloid voice Avanna but eventually got singer Breanne Düren for the final version of "Sea of Voices"."
 * The main thing here is just that these sentences could be separated for clarity. Skyshifter   talk  00:24, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Ah, I now see what you mean. ✅ —TS

Release and promotion
 * "Though the song came as a surprise to followers of his work, it was well-received by audiences." I feel like this should be in Reception; same for the trending topic info
 * ✅ —TS
 * You should mention that the song specifically became a trending topic during the Oscars
 * ✅ —TS
 * There is no information about the remixes here
 * —TS

Reception
 * Sea of Voices' received a generally positive critical response." I'm not a big fan of this when it's not referenced, though I understand if you want to keep it.
 * . I can probably bundle a few citations to verify this statement, but I'll remove it if that's not possible. —TS
 * ; critics have lots of nice descriptors for the song, but rarely give it praise in a way that can be unambigiously interpreted as "positive reception" without original research. —TS
 * "but was nonetheless accepted by his fans." If the "it was well-received by audiences" sentence above is moved to this section, I think you should merge these two sentences, because they say the same thing.
 * ✅ —TS
 * "and Vice commented" → "and a Vice writer commented", to clearly differentiate from Stolman
 * ✅ —TS
 * "Several reviewers found the song reminiscent of the electronic band M83" — you need to add more references here to justify "Several reviewers", as currently there is just one
 * This is verified by the following footnotes as well, but I can see how that could be confusing to readers. ✅ —TS
 * "prior to the release of his album Nurture, Robinson released the single 'Unfold' in collaboration with Totally Enormous Extinct Dinosaurs." → "Robinson released 'Unfold', a collaboration with Totally Enormous Extinct Dinosaurs, as a single from his second studio album Nurture." — or something similar, just to make it clear that "Unfold" is a single from that album
 * ✅ —TS

References
 * Ref 6 needs timestamp
 * ✅ —TS
 * "Interview" → "interview" in the title of ref 6, as you're following a consistent title casing for the references. I just discovered the URL has "OwO". I can't unsee this now.
 * Wikipe-tan head.png done uwu —TS
 * :3 Skyshifter   talk  00:50, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Add italics to "Your EDM" in the title of ref 10
 * ✅ —TS
 * Italicize the name of the album in the title of ref 18
 * ✅ —TS
 * YourEDM → Your EDM on ref 19
 * ✅. Thanks for the more detailed reference formatting checks! —TS

Spot-check
 * 1 → "worked really hard on" isn't here, I think you meant to cite Cuepoint. Otherwise fine
 * Correct; ✅. —TS
 * 7 → Fine, but I'd recommend citing ref 8 again immediately after the "sweeter, cuter, [and] more feminine" quote to clarify where it's from
 * ✅ —TS
 * 8 → McCarthy didn't find inspirations from Justice. The article quotes Robinson saying Justice's "Cross" is an inspiration for him in general. Otherwise fine
 * That's quite a silly thing for me to miss! ✅ —TS
 * 11 → Fine
 * 15 → Fine
 * 17 → Fine

Skyshifter  talk  18:32, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Skyshifter: All comments addressed! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 06:46, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
 * As the "received a generally positive response" sentence was removed from Reception, I've reworded a sentence from the lead — feel free to adjust it. I am now Green check.svgY passing this article! Skyshifter   talk  09:46, 16 May 2024 (UTC)