Talk:Christmas Queens 2/GA1

Latest comment: 3 years ago by Another Believer in topic GA Review

GA Review edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 17:29, 16 December 2020 (UTC)Reply


Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose ( ) 1b. MoS ( ) 2a. ref layout ( ) 2b. cites WP:RS ( ) 2c. no WP:OR ( ) 2d. no WP:CV ( )
3a. broadness ( ) 3b. focus ( ) 4. neutral ( ) 5. stable ( ) 6a. free or tagged images ( ) 6b. pics relevant ( )
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked   are unassessed

We had discussed the prospect of me potentially reviewing one of your articles this winter in the past; I will now do it! --K. Peake 17:29, 16 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thank you! ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:33, 16 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Infobox and lead edit

  • Recording date is not sourced anywhere in the body
    • I don't even remember adding 2016 to the infobox. I have no idea when the album was recorded so   Removed ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:50, 16 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • Target holiday to Holiday music
  • "by various artists, released by" → "by various artists. It was released by" since the opening para is currently too short at only two sentences
  • "The 30-track album is a sequel" → "Consisting of 30 tracks, the album is a sequel"
  • Add release year of Christmas Queens in brackets
  • "contestants as well as" → "contestants alongside"
  • "for "Working Holiday" featuring" → "for "Working Holiday", which features"
  • "and Manila Luzon, a web series called" → "and Manila Luzon. A web series was released for it, titled"
    • But doing this makes the second sentence grammatically incorrect. See below comment. ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:04, 16 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • That is reasonable, but still change "called" to "titled" in the above manner though. --K. Peake 09:25, 17 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • "and a tour with December shows" → "and a tour by various artists with December 2016 shows"
    • I implemented your preferred wording here but kept a single sentence instead of splitting into 2, in order to keep the text grammatically correct. Does this work for you? ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:57, 16 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • Why are the countries not ordered alphabetically?
  • You should add a sentence after this one about the album's critical reception, writing: "Christmas Queens 2 received..."
    • I just added "received a mixed critical reception" ahead and the chart placement claim because there aren't really overarching opinions, I would say. Critics more or less said things they liked and didn't like about individual performers, more than provide commentary on the album as a whole. Would you agree? ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:04, 16 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • Yes, it is fine to not give an overview when it is extremely hard to. --K. Peake 17:00, 17 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • "Christmas Queens 2 reached a peak position of number two" → "It peaked at number two"
  • You still need to change to "peaked at" to be less wordy. --K. Peake 09:25, 17 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Composition edit

Release and promotion edit

  • "The album was released by" → "Christmas Queens 2 was released by"
  • Add the appropriate citation(s) at the end of the second sentence
  • "debuted on Billboard on November 25." → "debuted through Billboard on November 25, 2016."
  • Target Santa to Santa Claus
  • "Glenn Garner said," → "Glenn Garner said of the video," to be specific
  • Wikilink hoarse voice
  • "The web series Christmas Queens was announced in early November;" → "A web series for Christmas Queens 2 entitled Christmas Queens was announced in early November 2016;"
    • Done, except I left out "for Christmas Queens 2" because I'm not certain the series is specific to this album. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:52, 17 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Tour and live performances edit

Reception and chart history edit

  • Retitle to Reception, as that can refer to both critical and commercial reception comfortably
  • "Joe Lynch of Billboard wrote," → "Lynch wrote of Christmas Queens 2,"
  • "which he said was" → "which he said is"
  • Target synth to Synthesizer
  • "Sean Maunier of Metro Weekly called the compilation" → "Maunier called the compilation"
  • The img of Thorgy Thor should be at the top of this section because it will be closer to the tour with that positioning
  • Wikilink ode
  • "with some songs that" → "noting that some songs"
  • "some of the interludes" → "a number of the interludes" to avoid repetitive wording
  • "He thought that Jackie Beat" → "He thought Jackie Beat"
  • Target dance to Dance music
  • "funny attitude". He then summarized" → "funny attitude", before summarizing"
  • "matching the performance of the original Christmas Queens." → "matching the debut and peak of its prequel."

Track listing edit

  • Oh, my bad; I was just used to seeing things the way I suggested but you needn't change the track listing then. --K. Peake 17:00, 17 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Charts edit

References edit

  • Copyvio score is too high at 58,6%; fix quoting from the refs to reduce this
    • Hmmm, the only extended quotes are the two in the "Reception" section, which I'm reluctant to trim because they are the best commentary about the album as a whole as opposed to individual performances. Is trimming required if the quotes are appropriately attributed, given proper weight, and otherwise integrated nicely within the article overall? ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:58, 17 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Final comments and verdict edit

  •   On hold until you have fixed the issues, but I definitely have faith in you to do so. Was great to review one of your articles for the first time since the summer; one thing I did notice was how great the addition of images was throughout! --K. Peake 09:25, 17 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
    Kyle Peake, Thanks for reviewing. Done with Round 1 of addressing your concerns. ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:33, 17 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
    Another Believer Very timely response, but I replied where things still need covering! --K. Peake 17:00, 17 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
    Kyle Peake, Have another look? ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:44, 17 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
    Another Believer  Pass now after I took another look and did some minor copy editing to add some moderate finishing touches, congrats on this GA and I heavily applaud not just your response time but how you address the comments in such a constructive manner! --K. Peake 18:46, 17 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
    Kyle Peake, Thanks so much! ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:47, 17 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.