Talk:Mama (Spice Girls song)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Adabow (talk · contribs) 10:04, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

The article is nearly at GA standards. I will place the review on hold for a week, awaiting improvements.

Thank you for reviwing the article, and sorry for the late reply. Frcm1988 (talk) 05:03, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   nearly

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

• Can you put quote marks around the quote in the 'Writing and inspiration' section?

That paragraph is a block quote, and according to Wikipedia:MOSQUOTE: Do not enclose block quotations in quotation marks and especially avoid decorative quotation marks in normal use. Frcm1988 (talk) 05:03, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

• I copy-edited the 'Composition' section

*This section needs consistency in its tense

• Then a choir, arranged by Mark Beswick,[5] supplemented the group during the last part of the song,[2] which consists in the repetition of the chorus until it gradually fades out. reads terribly

Reworded. Frcm1988 (talk) 05:03, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

• 'Music video' section: "though none of the group's members grew up together" needs a source

There is no explicit source that mention this, but there is a segment on one of their official books called First Impressions where each of them talk how they met and what they thought about the other girls when they first met. I could add that as a source. Frcm1988 (talk) 05:03, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Please do. Adabow (talk · contribs) 05:22, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Added source. Frcm1988 (talk) 17:49, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

• 'Live performances' section: "All five girls standed together" → All five girls stood together

Corrected Frcm1988 (talk) 05:03, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

• Credits and personnel - these should be in alphabetical order

I believe this is always written in order of importance, first the artist, then the producers, then the technical staff, other musicians and artwork. I placed them in the order that appers on the album. I can't find a guideline for songs but the personnel section in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums don't mention anything about this. Frcm1988 (talk) 05:03, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

OK, I suppose it's up to you. Adabow (talk · contribs) 05:22, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

• 'Charts, peaks and certifications' should simply be 'Charts and certifications'

Replaced. Frcm1988 (talk) 05:03, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

• Notes - for the books, wikilink to their entry in the 'References section'. See Wikipedia:Citing sources/Further considerations#Wikilinks to full references for more on this.

That is one style of inline citation, I used this one through the other Spice Girls articles for consistency with the style that was already there. Frcm1988 (talk) 05:03, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

• Also make sure that you have given the correct publisher, especially the Hung Medien pages (ie Belgian, Dutch, Australian, New Zealand etc charts). Hung Medien publishes these pages, interpreting them from the chart provider. However, the chart provider should be omitted.

But those organizations are the original publishers, Hung Medien only have the permission to reproduce the charts on the website. Frcm1988 (talk) 05:03, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, those organisations originally published the charts, but Hung Medien compiled the charting positions each week for the one song. If it were a mirror of the original chart then the chart organisations would need to be credited, but not here. Adabow (talk · contribs) 05:22, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

I putted Hung Medien as the work, but kept the organizations as the publishers. Frcm1988 (talk) 17:49, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

I still think that it is not technically correct, but as other reviewers have let it go in other SG songs, I suppose it's more of a FA thing. The article is otherwise quite well-written, so I'm happy to pass it now. Adabow (talk · contribs) 19:29, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

• Breadth - fine
• NPOV - yes
• Stable - yes
• Media - good job