Talk:Pow (Elvana Gjata song)/GA1

Latest comment: 2 years ago by Kyle Peake in topic GA Review

GA Review edit

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

Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 07:16, 20 April 2022 (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

Yet another review of an old nom! --K. Peake 07:16, 20 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Infobox and lead edit

  • Infobox looks good!
  • "and produced by" → "while produced by"
  • "was applauded by" → "received positive reviews from numerous" or something similar, per the usage of selected in the body and the small amount of critics
  • Wikilink music video
  • Remove wikilink on New York City per WP:OVERLINK and the US introduction, as everyone knows where that place is
  • "the song found commercial success," → "the song achieved success," and remove the Switzerland position per it being too low for lead notability

Background and composition edit

  • "on her social media in" → "on her Instagram in" per the source, with the wikilink
  • "was noted by a critical commentary" → "was noted by critical commentary"
  • Add a source at the end of the last sentence for the runtime
  • "garnered positive reviews from" → "was met with positive reviews from"
  • Remove website introduction to Illyrian Pirates and attribute the review to someone, preferably "the staff of". Also, what exactly makes this source reliable?
  • "The website pointed out that its her" → "The staff went on to point out her"
  • Remove website introductions to Dosja and Top Music, also attribute reviews to someone; you could use something like "a writer for" instead of the staff to be less reptitive
  • "were the most focusing" → "are the most focusing"
  • "ending 22 February 2022," → "ending 20 February 2022," per the source

Promotion edit

  • Retitle to Music video per this being the only form of promotion listed
  • Wikilink music video on the img text and remove wikilink on New York City per WP:OVERLINK
  • "An accompanying music video for "Pow"" → "A music video for "Pow""
  • "having been also credited as" → "who also received credit as"
  • Remove wikilink on New York City
  • "across the city, including at the" → "across the city, including the"
  • Again, attribute the Illyrian Pirates review to someone
  • "and commended the Gjata's fashion" → "and commended Gjata's fashion"
  • Remove the word Greek before Mikropragmata
  • Remove introductions to Njeshi and Gazeta Metro, attributing the reviews to someone per earlier
  • "similarly lauded her fashion noting" → "similarly lauded her style, noting"

Track listing edit

  • Remove this section because it is a one track single and the length is sourced in the body

Personnel edit

  • Are there enough persons credited to create this section?
Section created. Iaof2017 (talk) 11:48, 20 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Charts edit

  • Good

Release history edit

  • Good

References edit

  • Copyvio score looks nearly perfect at 2.0%!!!
  • Remove Apple Music from the titles of ref 3's citations and add the countries in brackets for the publishers
  • Cite YouTube in the via parameter instead on ref 5
  • Again, what makes ref 6 a reliable source? I see no evidence of an editorial process or the source being mentioned by well-regarded ones.
I have been in communication with the staff of the website, and it's a relatively new website, which I was told was created back in January/February 2022. Unfortunately, there is no other website dedicated to Albanian music, reviews and all related stuff at all. Iaof2017 (talk) 11:48, 20 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
Removed. Iaof2017 (talk) 11:48, 20 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Final comments and verdict edit

  •   On hold until all of the issues are fixed, after reviewing this decent article! --K. Peake 09:30, 20 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
Hey @Kyle Peake:, thanks for your review. I solved your comments! Iaof2017 (talk) 11:48, 20 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
  •  Pass now, I take no issue with the sources used now! --K. Peake 20:44, 20 April 2022 (UTC)Reply