Wikipedia:Peer review/Drama Queen (Ivy Queen album)/archive2

Drama Queen (Ivy Queen album)
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because…I tried it for GA earlier and the year, and was not passed. Now, I would like to try again and would appreciate ANY comments. I feel the Background, Recording and production, Release and promotion, and Commercial performance sections need the most help, though the whole article could benefit from it.
 * Previous peer review

Thanks, DivaKnockouts (talk) 02:12, 30 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Comments from Nikkimaria
 * The description page for the sound samples should mention how long the originals are - the rule is actually "under 30 second or under 10%, whichever is shorter", so you need total length to calculate that


 * What makes this a reliable source?


 * Don't use contractions
 * Does this apply to quotes as well?
 * Quotes shouldn't be modified. Only the prose should have contractions removed. Chris857 (talk) 20:13, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you, that is what I thought. ✅


 * Be careful about being too informal, outside of direct quotes
 * Where exactly?


 * WP:OVERLINK - for example, Tainy twice in first three sentences


 * "where the building was resembled piece by piece" - do you mean "re-assembled"?


 * "Drama Queen has been described as R&B meets reggaeton and was the first time Ivy Queen experimented with the genre" - which genre?


 * "Themes include cool & cocky, pool party, TGIF, partying and driving, according to AMG" - probably want to quote this directly


 * "A more diverse set of musical styles prominent on her 2007 effort Sentimiento." - this is not a complete sentence


 * "I have a throne flanked by holy souls" - is this meant to be a quote?


 * Is there a way to avoid repeating "features minor key tonality, bowed strings, a string ensemble and synthesizers"?
 * Do you have any suggestions?


 * Generally, the Song structure section needs editing for tone and flow. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:03, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The article was recently copy-edited in the past few days, DivaKnockouts (talk) 01:38, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

If you have any questions about the PR, ping me on my talk--I don't watchlist these reviews. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 17:48, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Comments by David Fuchs
 * The lead section seems to mostly focus on the album's charting info, which while interesting and information that should be mentioned in a lead, isn't the whole of what it should contain. More information about its production, promotion, and reception would be good.
 * Remember that the lead isn't a replacement for the body content, so to a degree you need to repeat some introductions. The "Background" section doesn't tell us anything about the singer in broad strokes and just leads into her album. Perhaps prefacing it with some information about the performance of her last album would help it flow better. To give a slightly different genre example, the article for the development of Star Trek: The Motion Picture starts off with an explanation of the TV series the movie was based on and what happened to it.
 * For a reggaeton album, I'd expect that there would be more Spanish-language resources to boost a lot of the sections, such as reception and production.
 * On the same note, the ornery part of using those sources is it's harder to discern if some sources are reliable or not. I'm not sure about Reggaeton Online and Primera Hora.
 * Overall I'd say the sections are good in the sense that they have some information, it's presented cogently, and it's a broad summary, although I'm really missing the recording and development information (by far the shortest section.)
 * From one of the music sample thumbnail captions: "It has been described as being "uplifting"." Who said it was uplifting? For subjective statements like this you should always attribute it where feasible.
 * I'd suggest breaking up the reception section into thematic chunks--group comments about lyrical content and messages, for instance, in one paragraph, while comments about musical aspects goes in another. More general comments can be put at the beginning.