Talk:No Me Queda Más/GA1
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: ♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:05, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Starting read through will post comments over the next few hours.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:05, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- Intro
- "while the single became the third single in the United States." So this was the third single from the album and her third single in total or what? Please clarify.
- "the song was included in every venue." Awkward, "She performed the song in every venue on the tour" would be better.
- Please avoid quotes in the introduction. They are also heavily stacked in favour of the song which makes it look POV. The whole mid section dramatically needed a cut and summary that is was well received. It reads like a magazine. All you need to say is that is was successful. Review comments belong in the main body not the lead.
- "While in love with Selena's sister, Suzette Quintanilla, lead keyboardist, Ricky Vela was angry when he had met her husband, Billy. Written out-of-emotions, Vela wrote a poem to Suzette explaining the betrayal he had felt. He then turned it into a song that A.B. Quintanilla III wanted Selena to record it for the album Amor Prohibido. " -the prose here is a little clumsy and reads like a story.
- "Other popular artists such as Kat DeLuna, David Archuleta and Prince Royce, has covered the song during their live tours." -have covered.
- "During the entire month of March 2010, "No Me Queda Mas" and a few other Selena music videos were selected for a Selena tribute for her fifteenth anniversary of her passing to 42 million homes nationwide on Music Choice On Demand." the 15th anniversary not her fifteenth anniversary.
- Background and production
- "is highly known as a "fan favorite" tune" -awkward, something like "one of Selena's most popular songs would be better.
- again the Ricky Vela part needs a rewrite. You should not duplicate text from the intro.
- too many "beautiful" references. Doesn't come across as NPOV. The background and production is supposed to be a solid insight into production, the vast majority of it would be better suited to the reception.
- no close quotation mark at the end of the bottom paragraph
- Composition
- Why is "There's nothing left" quoted?
- Live performances
- "During the "Noche De Carnaval" concert in Miami, Florida, Selena wore a black see-through bustier, black mini-skirt with black knee-high boots." WHy is this relevant to the song?
- Critical reception
"Extremely awesome job, lovely, best, beautiful. biggest, high praise, very amusing and lovely "etc. -Sorry I can't even begin to review that section. It comes across as extreme POV even if they are quotes. Way too many quotes and looks like fan cruft. A light summary remarking that it was very successful with Hispanics and seen as one of her best songs would be more appropriate. A couple of reviews are fine but that many looks like you are POV stacking. No negative criticism of the song?
- Music video
- Background and development
- Please merge this into the Background and production section. This is more the sort of material I had expected to read there. In the reception section of the music video please merge into the main reception section, after cutting down on the quotes as I mentioned above to its fair sized. Please merge video synopsis into Composition and lyric content and rename it Composition and content or something.
- Reception
"Victoria Díaz of Grupo Reforma had reviewed the song and ended her review about the video being "addicting and beautiful"". Addicting? Addictive?
- Sources
- imdb is not a reliable source and should be discredited as a source.
- Heavy use of Amazon, a commercial marketplace as a source. Amazon is not a reliable source to write an encyclopedia article.
- What makes Ainnow.com and Vodpod.com WP:RS?
- Irregular date formatting. Please change 2010-09-04 etc to 4 September 2010.
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- Needs a copyedit/rewrite
- B. MoS compliance:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- Contains numerous unreliable sources
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- Needs a reorganization and major cut of reviews, especially in the lead
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- It looks like it has been written by a fan with heavy stacking with gushing comments
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- 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:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
I'm failing this as I feel the problems with it are too numerous to make it worth putting it on hold. I recommend you address the points I've identified in the article give it a major rewrite/reorganization as suggested, cut the parts which come across as failing NPOV and try to improve its overall quality before renominating.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:01, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- Fixed all or most issues that you have provided in this review. I'll nominate it for a copy-edit before re-nominating. Thank you, AJona1992 (talk) 14:02, 3 August 2011 (UTC)