Wikipedia:Peer review/Look at Me Now (Chris Brown song)/archive1
| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to take it to GA status. Any comments and suggestions on how to improve the article would be great.
Thanks, Ozurbanmusic (talk) 12:11, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
- Hi. I see some large scale issues, so to give you an idea, I'll explain. First off, the article has a lot of short and choppy sentences: "The song's production was also praised. However, some critics criticized Brown's rapping skills." Also, there is absolutely no real background information on the song, its inspiration, recording etc. I'm sure you can find something. Next, the two images fail rational. What purpose do they serve? That he is wearing a red cap? Those are some main issues I would work with before giving small nitpicks.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 20:41, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
- I've found more background information and have removed the image. Are there any more suggestions/issues? Ozurbanmusic (talk) 04:57, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
- Okay. I'm back. Now I know I told you before to remove the music video screenshots because they were not helpful to the article, but you should add one maybe showing Brown in mid-dance and with those lights. You could add that critics complimented his dancing and the colorful imagery. If you cannot find an image online that fits the criteria, I can upload one for you, as I can crop images directly from the video. Next, the references look good, but you are missing one thing. When citing a newspaper, 9, 11, 15, you must use the "Cite news" not "Cite web", so that the publishers automatically come up in brackets. Other than that, dates are inconsistent (some are spelled out and some are in numeric format). Some, like 9 and the Rap-Up sources are missing publishers, and some like 31 are missing accessdates. Content wise, its a pretty good sized article with a song with only coverage in the US. The prose can use a bit of tightening, but are passable with through GAN after the editor posts issues. As of now, with this, I'd say your good with nominating.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 07:22, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
- Ok I've fixed the references. "You could add that critics complimented his dancing and the colorful imagery." – do you mean in the lead or music video section? And yes could you please upload the image just in case I get it wrong :) Oz talk 10:59, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
- Done! Tell me what you think :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 12:21, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
- Great image! Thanks for reviewing :) Oz talk 12:23, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
- Done! Tell me what you think :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 12:21, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
- Ok I've fixed the references. "You could add that critics complimented his dancing and the colorful imagery." – do you mean in the lead or music video section? And yes could you please upload the image just in case I get it wrong :) Oz talk 10:59, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
- Okay. I'm back. Now I know I told you before to remove the music video screenshots because they were not helpful to the article, but you should add one maybe showing Brown in mid-dance and with those lights. You could add that critics complimented his dancing and the colorful imagery. If you cannot find an image online that fits the criteria, I can upload one for you, as I can crop images directly from the video. Next, the references look good, but you are missing one thing. When citing a newspaper, 9, 11, 15, you must use the "Cite news" not "Cite web", so that the publishers automatically come up in brackets. Other than that, dates are inconsistent (some are spelled out and some are in numeric format). Some, like 9 and the Rap-Up sources are missing publishers, and some like 31 are missing accessdates. Content wise, its a pretty good sized article with a song with only coverage in the US. The prose can use a bit of tightening, but are passable with through GAN after the editor posts issues. As of now, with this, I'd say your good with nominating.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 07:22, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
- I've found more background information and have removed the image. Are there any more suggestions/issues? Ozurbanmusic (talk) 04:57, 22 July 2011 (UTC)