Wikipedia:Peer review/Lighters (song)/archive1

Lighters (song)
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because a while ago, I wrote a full draft on this article and almost completely rewrote it. Of course many users have contributed to it since. I am planning Lighters (song) for good article status and I wanted to get a second opinion on how to drastically improve this article.

If you are willing enough to review it, I am hoping you are very familiar with Wikipedia's manual of style and that you are familiar with the policies. Please be as strict with it as you can. I don't want this article to just satisfy the good article criteria. I want it to be its absolute best.

Thanks, W IKIPEDIAN PENGUIN  (♫♫)  15:52, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

I just think it's a bit too early for the article to become a good article, as the song is too new; especially the fact that the music video is still being shot, and obviously causing the music video section severely lack information-SCB &#39;92 (talk) 18:41, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Withdrawn. I nominated the article before any news about the video was revealed. I'll wait till there is a well developed Music video section. — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  18:46, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

And have a screenshot of the music video after the music video premieres-SCB &#39;92 (talk) 22:00, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Of course. I always do that. — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  22:02, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for your work on this article. Articles that meet the "absolute best" standards on Wikipedia are FAs, so I will review this as if it were at FAC - see WP:WIAFA. Here are some suggestions for improvement. Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 19:13, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow - there are many FAs on singles that seem as if they would be useful models.
 * Biggest concern I have is the language, which is the most difficult FA criterion for most articles to mee (1a, a professional level of English). This is also a GA concern. I would make sure this gets a copy edit before GAN - I will try to point out as many problems as possible, but these will only be examples, not a complete list. See Featured_articles. A relatively recent FA on a song is 4 Minutes (Madonna song) which may be a good model as it features other singers too.
 * First sentence - should featuring Bruno Mars be in there? His name is on the single cover.
 * Also the (2011) in the first sentence seems awkward - since the date of release is given in the next sentence, is this needed?
 * This is not a normal use of the word "impacted" It impacted mainstream radio in the United States on July 5, 2011, and was released by Shady Records. Also try to avoid passive voice wherever possible - how about something like "Shady Records released the song for mainstream radio airplay in the United States on July 5, 2011."?
 * how about "...who was added after the original cut."? ''The song features American singer-songwriter Bruno Mars, who was not in the original cut.
 * I do not think something can have both positive and mixed reviews - mixed means there were both poisitive and negative reviews. Tighten this too The song was met with both positive and mixed reviews[;] where some critics praised the change in style [as a break from more hardcore and aggressive themes of] from the other tracks found in Hell: The Sequel, complimenting it as a break from more hardcore and aggressive themes, while others criticized it for the same reason.
 * The Background section is confused and difficult to follow. Part of that is because it does not seem to go in chronological order - since this is telling a story, why not tell it in order (unless there is some very good reason not to). I also think part of the problem is that much of it seems to be from topics addressed in other sections of the article - mostly Composition.
 * I would assume that Background would talk at least briefly about why the group was formed, and perhaps about how the song came to be a collaboration with Mars (though that could be in Composition).
 * The infobox says it was recorded in California and Michigan - this sentence is a mess, not sure what it is trying to say - probably needs to be split into two or more sentences and the apparent contradiction removed. The song was recorded in Los Angeles, California in various places; it was recorded in Effigy Studios by Mike Strange, Isolation Studios by Asar and Levcon Studios by Ari Levine of The Smeezingtons, a music production and songwriting group consisting of Philip Lawrence and Bruno Mars as well.[3]
 * Similarly Composition has critical reception in it.
 * Isn't the structure of the song more like: Chorus (by Mars), Verse 1 (Eminem), Chorus (Mars), Verse 2 (Royce ...), Bridge (music) (Mars), and Chorus (Mars)?
 * MOS Says to use "double quotes" not 'single quotes' - Bruno Mars' next two plays of the hook and his own 'verse' use a fast bass beat and rhythm. The final play of the hook is without any percussion, similar to the first play.[14] (I think his verse is the bridge)
 * Avoid WP:OVERLINKing
 * MOS says once a person is introduced with their full name, only their last name should be used - so Bruno Mars (first time) and then just Mars (can get away with Bruno Mars on first use in the body of the article (after the lead).
 * What the article calls "red sparks" are red highway flares - see Flare (pyrotechnic)
 * Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)