Talk:You're Losing Me/GA1

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

Nominator: 05:11, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Pollosito (talk · contribs) 21:58, 7 April 2024 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
 * a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Hey, @Gained. I will be reviewing this article in a few days. I'm a little unsure because this article is about my idol, Taylor Swift, and I want to try not to screw up with this review. Also, so that maybe you can nominate the topic Midnights to good quickly. Best, Santi (talk) 21:58, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Copyright

 * Let's start with the most urgent. I'm so scared that this article has the 78.8% copyright violation to a ref that isn't in the article. I guess it's an encyclopedia that copied this article, or something is up. Honestly, I don't know what to do with that.
 * With the matter resolved, we see that the article has less than 20% similarity, plus its percentage is in green, so everything is fine in this sense.

Lead

 * "number 56" => "number 27" for body.

Background and release

 * Although it was not previously required of you in previous nominations, I think you should look for another reference that confirms the album's release on October 21, 2022.
 * It would be nice if the presence of "Hits Different" on the CD-exclusive Target album edition and "You're Losing Me" on the Late Night Edition (also the announcement of this edition release) were confirmed more explicitly on the first paragraph.
 * Reconfigurate refs 7 and 10. They are the same.
 * No reference mentions that the "pirated" song was uploaded on social media and that Universal took it down for copyright reasons. I think that part needs to be improved.

Composition and lyrics

 * The reference 15 does not mention that the song is "atmospheric."
 * "autobiographical"... I don't know if I should leave it like this because of the intention, or if we should rather reread the source.
 * Although it's not explicit or not that easy to find but the Variety source wrote that it's "likely to be perceived as personal, not fictional", which alludes to the song being autobiographical. Gained (talk) 04:40, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Critical reception

 * Passed.

Commercial performance

 * Isn't there more specific impressive information about the song's global performance as well as the one it had in the United States?
 * I think every source regarding its chart performance has been used within the article.

Personnel

 * The truth is I don't know what difference there is between quoting Tidal and the liner notes of Midnights, but it's approved.

Charts

 * Passed.

Comments

 * Take as much time as you want, because I understand the tight schedule you have; I have it too, but a little lighter. Regarding copyright, I suppose it is more of a platform error than really plagiarism. It also made the mistake of saying that Satellite (Bebe Rexha and Snoop Dogg song) did not have any similarity with its sources, something absurdly impossible. However, what worries me is that another reviewer will observe this and sanction the article for X reason. OMG, I think I'm worried too much. Santi (talk) 22:12, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Hey @Pollosito! Thanks for choosing this article to review. I don't think you need to be worried because the ref that caused all this is a Swift fan page that for some reason copied many of the article's content. Unfortunately, I would be gone entirely for a few days so I'm pretty sure I won't make a single edit in that time period. Gained (talk) 11:51, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Look, I'm still confused about the changes made to the "Background and release" section, where the adjective went from "pirated" to "unofficial." However, I think it's common sense, so I think there's not that much of a problem, because the truth is I'm a very literal boy sometimes (and sometimes that's why they can't stand me LOL) Santi (talk) 02:07, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @Pollosito Honestly I sometimes simplify my conversations to that when people don't understand what I'm trying to explain, and even if I simplify it, they still don't understand LOL. I don't know if I could simplify the info anymore because I have no more ideas on how to do that. Nevertheless, I believe I have addressed all the points you given. Gained (talk) 04:52, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @Gained: Ok, so the article has been . However, I'll do the whole process tomorrow because, first, I'm on my phone and I hate editing that way, and lastly, because I have to sleep. Congratulations anyway! Santi (talk) 05:00, 13 April 2024 (UTC)