Wikipedia:Peer review/Part of Me (Katy Perry song)/archive1

Part of Me (Katy Perry song)
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I plan on nominating the article for GA status and I need suggestions on improvements beforehand.

Thanks, teman13 (talk) 01:13, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Please note, this is already a good article. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:13, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Assuming you want to go for FA eventually, here are some suggestions for improvement. I think it needs a fair amount of work before it would do well at FAC. 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; 18:11, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow - there are quite a few FAs on songs at Featured_articles which should give some model FA song articles
 * Two dead external links here
 * I do not think the lead does a very good job of summarizing the article - I would say in the first sentence that it was the lead single (not just that it is "... taken from the re-release of her second studio album, Teenage Dream: The Complete Confection (2012).")
 * I would also make it clear in the first poaragraph of the lead when the song was written (2010), and that despite this it was not included in the original version of the album Teenage Dream
 * I owuld put all of the assumed inspirations together in the lead. I would also mention Russell Brand by name - he is already mentioned 11 times in the article (but not by name in the lead). McCoy is mentioned only once in the body of the article, and in the lead.
 * Avoid vague time terms like current or so far - see It has so far been certified Platinum in the United States, Australia and New Zealand. I would use "As of June 2012" or something similar instead, as "so far" is too vague and likely to become outdated.
 * The most difficult criterion for most articles to meet at WP:FAC is 1a, a professional level of English. This has a lot of places where the prose could be tightened or improved and would need a copyedit before any try at FAC. A few examples follow. See WP:WIAFA
 * The song received mixed to generally positive reviews from contemporary critics, who praised the song's production, while some criticizing Perry's vocals.  (should be "while some criticized...")
 * Avoid passive voice wherever possible, and it is "participated in" ''The artwork for the single was photographed by Mary Ellen Matthews as part of a photographic essay for the television program Saturday Night Live, where Perry participated of episode 710 of season 37.
 * This needs a ref ''"Part of Me" reached number one elsewhere in Europe such as Croatia, Poland, Hungary and the Netherlands. The song also peaked at number 1 in Venezuela and peaked at number 2 in South Africa.
 * Not all refs are complete - current ref 91 is just "Media Guide". Retrieved 16 April 2012." and needs title and the fact that this is an archived url. See ref 97 for an example of how to do this better "Pop Rock General". Record Report. 2012-04-28. Archived from the original on 2012-04-27." Though that needs to say the ref is in Spanish.
 * Make sure sources used are relaible - see WP:RS
 * Spell out abbreviations before first use (so USMC, MARPAT, etc.)
 * Make sure links are on first use - MARPAT is mentioned once before it is linked on its second use
 * The Critical reception section is a bit of a "quote farm" - I think more could be paraphrased and save short direct quotes for the best items
 * I was surprised that there was not more on the decision a) not to include the song on the original version of the album, and b) why there was a re-relase of the album (and not a whole new album)
 * I also looked at this ref and it points out how the lyrics were changed between the initial and final versions to make it seem as if the song were more about divorce and not just a breakup. I was surprised this is not mentioned in the article that I saw
 * I am not sure the Propaganda needs its own section - why not just make it part of the reception section? (Rename it "Reception and propaganda allegations")?
 * There seems to be a lot more coverage of the video comapred to material on the song itself.
 * 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.)
 * 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.)