Talk:One Love (Jennifer Lopez song)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Till I Go Home (talk · contribs) 07:45, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Infobox

• Remove the "Released" and "Format" information. It's not needed.
• Link the writers (if possible).

Lead

• "One Love" is a song recorded by American recording artist and actress Jennifer Lopez from her seventh studio album Love? (2011). -> remove "recorded" OR change "from" to "for".
• "One Love" received generally positive acclaim from music critics; who cited it as a stand-out track on Love?. Critics made note of the song's indirect manner, which had references to Lopez's ex-boyfriends and husbands, such as Sean Combs and Ben Affleck. -> awkward prose

Background

• Following the commercial and critical failure of Brave (2007) -> please specify what Brave is - you should always assume that the reader/audience knows nothing about the topic.
• and while pregnant with twins Max and Emme -> when was she pregnant?
• The project was kept under wraps until February 2009 -> awkward prose
• link Epic Records.
• A-Plus (Birchett and Shelton) and D'Mile wrote and presented the song to Lopez, in which she recalled as being "very generic"; she told the writers that she loved the idea of the song, but asked them "Why don't we make it more 'me'?" Lopez then sat with them and wrote new verses to the song, going through every major relationship she ever had asking the question "Is there one love?". Lopez described the song as being about "if we can ever have one true soul mate". This is unnacceptable. You have used the word "she" three times in one sentence, and the overall flow of the paragraph is just uncomfortable to digest.

Lyrical content and lawsuit

• Please move the lawsuit information to the "Reception" section as that is far too short.
• He also commented that the song was -> remove "also"
• The quotes need paraphrasing. Copying and pasting an entire quote is unacceptable.
• The Washington Post should be in italics.
• ...had filed a lawsuit against Lopez over "One Love" claiming that it contained lyrics about him without his own knowledge. -> comma needed between "One Love" and "claiming"
• Noa's business partner, Ed Meyer made a statement saying -> comma needed between "Ed Meyer" and "made"

Reception

• Another review stated -> can you actually specify the reviewer and where they are from or representing?
• Robert Copsey from Digital Spy called it generic -> Digital Spy should not be in italics.
• The quotes need paraphrasing.
• Please change the section name to "critical reception" since you are only discussing the reviews.

Live performances

• Lopez performed "One Love" live -> she either performed it live or dead, in which the latter is obviously impossible, so "live" is unnecessary.

Credits and personnel

• You have to list where the credits were adapted from.

References

Mmm they are in bad condition. Here is the list of tasks:

1. 1 - Publisher is Viacom.
2. 4 - needs a publisher
3. 5 - why is it "Billboard. Prometheus Global Media", whereas in #6 it's "Billboard. (Prometheus Global Media)"? Please be consistent.
4. 7 - that is not the publisher.
5. 8 - you only have the link.... where is the author, title, date, accessdate and publisher? Unacceptable.
6. 10 - what happened to the title? it's just truncated.
7. 12 - Rolling Stone should be in italics and have a publisher.
8. 14 - The Washington Post should be linked, in italics, and have a publisher.
9. 15 - Huffington Post - same as above.
10. 16 looks like a poor quality source, can you find a better one that discusses the same topic?
11. 17 - Radar Online is an unreliable source and has been discussed at WP:RSN.
12. 18 - Why haven't you named the author? It's in the source.
13. 19 - that is not the publisher.
14. 20 - incorrect publisher. You wrote it correctly previously!
15. 21 - needs publisher
16. 22 - needs publisher
17. 23 - LA Times is unacceptable and you have not listed the author.
18. 24 - publisher?
19. 25 - publisher?
20. 26 - publisher? date? access date?

Overall

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Normally I would put this on hold, but I have failed this. The references need serious attention (particularly the publishers), the quotes in the "Reception" and "Lyrical content" section need paraphrasing, and there is just awkward prose throughout the article. These issues need to be addressed away from this review. Thanks, Till I Go Home (talk) 08:48, 4 May 2012 (UTC)