Talk:Take a Bow (Leona Lewis song)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Robin (talk · contribs) 00:25, 3 February 2013 (UTC)


 * I'll review this. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  00:25, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

✅ ❌ ; Okay I'm fine with the weird capitalization of contemporary; however, the awkward sentence hasn't changed. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:21, 4 February 2013 (UTC) ✅ ❌ ; Its a valid wikilink &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:07, 6 February 2013 (UTC) ✅ ❌ ; a critical assessment has to be general. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:21, 4 February 2013 (UTC) ❌; Why? You told me to do the exact same thing a month ago. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:07, 6 February 2013 (UTC) ❌; the reason I want if formatted this way is because both live performances occured in 2010; clarity for the reader. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:21, 4 February 2013 (UTC) ❌ ; whatever. ✅
 * Lede
 * Tedder explained that he wanted to create an edgy song for Lewis so that it was not boring or predictable. -> Tedder explained that he wanted to create an edgy song for Lewis so that it would not be boring or predictable."
 * The sentence, "A Contemporary R&B and urban song, the lyrics focus the failure of a relationship." Why does contemporary have to be capitalised. Break the sentence into two sentences or restructure it. Suggestion; "Take a Bow" is a contemporary R&B and urban song, about a failed relationship.
 * It just is, you wouldn't put it in lower case. —  AARON  &bull; TALK   18:52, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * "It's composition" -> Its composition. "It's" means: "It is" which makes the current sentence incorrect.
 * Link music critics
 * Fix link to urban music it's a current redirect to Urban contemporary
 * "It garnered a mixed response from music critics, who thought that the production was unexpected and different but overshadowed Lewis' vocals." -> "The track garnered a mostly positive response from music critics, many of whom opined that the production is unexpected and different." I have read the critical reception section and only one reviewer complains about "overshadowed vocals".
 * Why?
 * Link digital download
 * Lewis performed "Take a Bow" at the Rock in Rio festival and it was included on The Labyrinth tour. -> Lewis performed "Take a Bow" at the Rock in Rio festival and it was included on the set list of Lewis' The Labyrinth tour in 2010.
 * Whatever not a biggie. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:07, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * link set list
 * Recording and production
 * "Take a Bow" was conceived during recording sessions for Lewis' debut studio album, Spirit, released in November 2007 -> "Take a Bow" was conceived during recording sessions for Lewis' debut studio album, Spirit, which was released in November 2007.

❌ Partly ❌; ❌ ; I prefer "including" because despite what sources suggest you can never truly know that those particular instruments encompass its instrumentation. ❌; Why? It could be factually incorrect? &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:07, 6 February 2013 (UTC) ❌ Again so what? Its just filler. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:07, 6 February 2013 (UTC) ✅ ✅ ❌ Why? Valid wikilink. See FA Irreplaceable for example. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:07, 6 February 2013 (UTC) ❌; What is its relevance?? Its filler and doesn't concern the reader in any way possible. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:07, 6 February 2013 (UTC) Partly ❌ ; The reason I want you to write "Timberlake's 2002 hit single"; is so that the reader can identify of which time the song is reminiscent. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:21, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Composition
 * Split this section into two separate sections.
 * Why on earth would you split a 4 line paragraph in two? Never. —  AARON  &bull; TALK   12:28, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Because these sections do not belong together. Ever. Why does the section size matter? &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:07, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * "Take a Bow", a Contemporary R&B and urban song, lasts for a duration of 3:54 and appears as the sixth track on the standard and deluxe versions of the album. -> "Take a Bow" is a contemporary R&B and urban song which lasts for a duration of 3:54." The sentence doesn't really flow and that it appears as the sixth track is trivial and filler in my opinion; remove.
 * "It's instrumentation consists of "daring, machine-made" pan pipes, "melodramtic" synths, a piano and a guitar." -> "Its instrumentation includes "daring, machine-made" pan pipes, "melodramtic" synths, a piano and a guitar."
 * Remove on which number it appears on the album; I don't see its relevance.
 * On the North American track listing, the song appears as the eleventh track and last for a duration of 3:53. -> "However, on the North American track listing, the song lasts for a duration of 3:53.
 * I think you realised the relevance of what I had written here lol. —  AARON  &bull; TALK   18:52, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I see the relevance of noting the difference of duration. However, I still don't think what number it appears on should be noted. So what?
 * Link instrumentation.
 * "It also features an Ebb and Flo groove. The song was composed in the key of A minor using common time at 70 beats per minute." -> Merge these two sentences.
 * "Lewis' vocal range spans over two octaves from low note of A3 to the high note of Eb6. - Link vocal range
 * Resolved. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:58, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The opening lyrics are "The flowers are faded now along with your letters." - remove this sentence; don't see its relevance.
 * Not resolved. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:58, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Chad Grischow for IGN and Sarah Rodman for The Boston Globe compared the songs production to Justin Timberlake's song "Cry Me a River". -> "Chad Grischow from IGN and Sarah Rodman of The Boston Globe compared the song's production to Justin Timberlake's 2002 hit single "Cry Me a River"."
 * Hit single is original research. —  AARON  &bull; TALK   12:28, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Its only two words and the entire planet knows that song is a global chart-topper which propelled Timberlake into solo stardom. But whatever just write 2002 or put it in brackets. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:07, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Now ✅. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:58, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

✅
 * The lyrics of "Take A Bow" pertain to a failed relationship, which Nick Levine for Digital Spy describes as "admirably stark." -> "which Nick Levine of Digital Spy described as "admirably stark."

✅ ❌ ; More formal prose + you can never know if the writer is a man or a woman. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:07, 6 February 2013 (UTC) ✅ ❌; doesn't matter &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:58, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Critical reception
 * Sarah Rodman for The Boston Globe wrote it was a "contender" to be released as a single because of how it is a mix of "classic and au courant" music. -> unnuke contender.
 * ? —  AARON  &bull; TALK   18:52, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * remove the "...." from contender; its not needed. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:21, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * No... it's a quote. —  AARON  &bull; TALK   12:28, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Its only one word, but okay. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:07, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Linda McGee for RTE was complimentary of Lewis decision to experiment with the song instead of taking a "slushy ballad" approach and staying in her comfort zone. > prefer "remaining" instead of "staying"; more formal.
 * She continued to write that it is for this reason that she is more suited to "the Beyoncé end of the market than the Mariah end." > "McGee further wrote"
 * No biggie &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:58, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Kitty Empure for The Guardian noted that all of the songs on Spirit are love songs, but only "Take a Bow" feels like it is from the 21st century. -> Her name is Kitty Empire.
 * Chad Grischow for IGN wrote that the "Take a Bow"'s production distracted from Lewis' vocal performance. -> "Chad Grischow of IGN wrote that the track's production overshadows Lewis' vocal performance."

✅
 * Live performances
 * "It was later included on the DVD release of the tour, called The Labyrinth Tour: Live from the O2" -> It was later included on the DVD release of the tour, The Labyrinth Tour: Live from the O2".

✅ ❌
 * Charts > Chart
 * Upon the release of Spirit, "Homeless" debuted at number 97 on the strength of digital download sales in the chart issue released on 24 November 2007. - I think you mean "Take a Bow".
 * link digital download.


 * Refs
 * Remove ref #13 its a repetition of ref #11
 * What? No it isn't. —  AARON  &bull; TALK   18:52, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * User:Tbhotch fixed it before you could. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:21, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

On hold. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  04:47, 3 February 2013 (UTC) I have placed a ❌ where you haven't done what I suggest. Could you please explain why? &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:21, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Done all that I agree with, which is most. —  AARON  &bull; TALK   18:52, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Because I don't agree with them/don't need to be changed. —  AARON  &bull; TALK   12:20, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Of course you disagree. What I want is an explanation on every note you've not done. So that we can have a proper discussion about it. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  01:04, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * ... because they are fine as they are and do not need to be changed, that is my reason for each one. —  AARON  &bull; TALK   01:08, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * How do you want this to work if you cannot even meet me halfway. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  01:52, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Halfway for what? I've said that they don't need to be changed. There were a few things I changed which I didn't agree with, but not to how you suggested, and you said partly not done, so if I did partly meet what you said, then I did in fact meet you halfway. I've stated that I don't think most points need to be changed. —  AARON  &bull; TALK   12:28, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * For clarity; I have written suggestions to improve the prose of the article, which I think was written hasty because your work is normally better than this. What I mean with halfway is: you writing an explanation at least as to why you haven't done what I suggest. I already know you disagree and that you don't think its needs to be changed. Meeting me halfway is explaining why you disagree on certain points, so that we can have proper discussion. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  21:50, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * This article isn't any different to how I normally write them. I've given you an explanation, I don't know how else to plainly or simply write that I do not believe that most of what you have suggested is an improvement or is better than what is already there. I was surprised when I first looked at this review at how much was here, to be honest. —  AARON  &bull; TALK   21:53, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * You don't have to link everything, all articles are different. It has since been pointed out to me that it's not completely necessary to link things such vocal range, digital download etc. Also, in English language written reviews, it is pretty obvious if the reviewer is male or female going by their name, unless they have a completely foreign name. —  AARON  &bull; TALK   22:20, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm aware of WP:Overlink. This is a music-oriented article, so it's perfectly accessible to link vocal range, music critics, and digital download. Yes it's pretty obvious whether female or male, though you can't be too certain; weird parents. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:58, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

For clarity (and because its messy above) I'm going to write some final notes down below. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:58, 7 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Lede
 * "A Contemporary R&B and urban song, the lyrics focus the failure of a relationship." the sentence doesn't flow and is awkard. Just restructure it.
 * Nothing wrong with this, it reads fine. —  AARON  &bull; TALK   23:05, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't agree. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  23:43, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Neither do I. —  AARON  &bull; TALK   23:46, 7 February 2013 (UTC)


 * "It garnered a positive response from music critics, who thought that the production was unexpected and different but overshadowed Lewis' vocals." -> Remove "but overshadowed Lewis' vocals." Only one reviewer thinks this; a critical assessment has to be general.
 * Changed to something different. —  AARON  &bull; TALK   23:05, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅; Nice touch! &mdash; Robin   (talk)  23:43, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

✅
 * Recording and production
 * The sentence, "Take a Bow" was recorded and mixed by Biancaniello, Mani, Watters and Omley at [2] As reported by Digital Spy, -> Something went wrong?
 * Done. —  AARON  &bull; TALK   23:05, 7 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Composition and critical reception
 * Split this section into two separate sections; these do not belong together. Section size does not matter.
 * Size most certainly does matter. Both paragraphs are far too short to be stand alone sections, it does not look right at all. Nothing wrong with this. —  AARON  &bull; TALK   23:05, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I tested out the difference, and I most certainly disagree. The article looks much better in my opinion. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  23:43, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I saw. —  AARON  &bull; TALK   23:46, 7 February 2013 (UTC)


 * The songs opening lyrics are "The flowers are faded now, along with your letters." -> the song's
 * Done. —  AARON  &bull; TALK   23:05, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Finish these queries and it's a pass. If you don't I'll fail this. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  22:58, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Finished. —  AARON  &bull; TALK   23:05, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Just two left! Good luck. &mdash; Robin   (talk)  23:43, 7 February 2013 (UTC)


 * You're relentless and I'm too busy; Passing! &mdash; Robin   (talk)  23:51, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Hahha. Thanks. —  AARON  &bull; TALK   23:54, 7 February 2013 (UTC)