This page consists of reviews of GA noms that I don't feel confident enough to review myself. I will note the articles' failings and compare my interpretation to that of the eventual reviewers of said articles
Good Article review progress box
|
copyvio
editAlmost certainly not, the part mentioned here almost certainly doesn't count (though it should probably be quoted)
Lead
editProvides undue weight to the chart performance and certifications of the song (3b)
Doesn't mention the critical reception of the song (1b)
Background and composition
editThe iTunes ref shows the song's release on the album, but not as a single (2c)
The iTunes ref only mentions the release on iTunes, but it could've been released elsewhere prior to iTunes (2c)
with the use of R&B, hip hop, deep house and Latin macabre influences.[5][6][7]
ref 5 doesn't support any of those statements[1] and deep house isn't mentioned in any of them. (2c)
The song's verses feature an acoustic guitar, while the chorus is mainly synth-based.[9]
ref 9 doesn't mention the synth. (2c)
According to Eilish, the song's lyrics were written from an entirely fictional perspective[10]
ref 10 doesn't support the statement, but ref 6 does. (2c?)
In an interview with Teen Vogue, Eilish stated that "Garbage" by Tyler, the Creator was the biggest inspiration for the song. The song's lyrics also reference the film V for Vendetta.[4]
ref 4 doesn't support any of these statements. (2c)
The V for Vendetta part may be a problem with the flow (should be before the inspiration), but I'm not sure[2] (1a?)
Critical reception
editOver half of this section is about chart performance and not critical reception (Change to "Reception", section header shouldn't be misleading). (1b?)
Much of the section is duplicated material from the performance tables at the bottom of the article.[3]
...it peaked at number three on the Bubbling Under Hot 100 chart. It peaked at number 79 on the UK Singles Chart.
This does not flow very well. I'd suggest adding the word "also", but the sentence after uses that word as well.[4] (1a)
Promotion
editThis section seems to contain information about the music video and some performances, not about "promotion" of the song. It also contains critical reception of the video (shouldn't that be in the other section?) (1b?)
Nothing about the promotion of the song (or the Marian Hill remix) is mentioned in the article. (3a)
The music video, directed by Miles and AJ, was released on March 22, 2017.[22]
The YouTube ref only provides the date the video was uploaded to YouTube, not necessarily when the video was first released.[5] (2c)
In it, Eilish, dressed in yellow baggy clothes,[23]
The ref doesn't mention the clothes being baggy. (2c)
...carrying a yellow flower. Throughout the video, she throws dollar bills in the air and dances along the highway. The video ends with her being stopped by a police officer eating a donut and twirling a baton as she drops the flower on the ground.[24][25]
None of the sources mention the flower. (2c)
"Bellyache" was also included on the setlist of Eilish's When We All Fall Asleep Tour (2019).[28] Eilish further performed the track during her 2020 Where Do We Go? World Tour.[29]
These 2 sentences can be merged into "Bellyache was also included in the setlists of Eilish's When We Fall Asleep and Where Do We Go tours. Also, further performed
doesn't seem like something a GA would say[6] (1a?)
Covers
editAlso in May 2019, Sigrid performed a live rendition of "Bellyache" for Sveriges Radio P3.[32]
I'm not sure if using the word "live" would be considered OR in this case. (2c?)
Charts
editFailed verification for:
- ARIA
- Slovakia
Certifications
editFailed verification for:
- Denmark
Overall
editI think this would be eligible for quickfail due to the very large amount of original research. Username6892 04:38, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
Notes
edit- ^ I think sources not supporting any statement should be removed for GA, but I'm not sure
- ^ I am doubting it, but feel free to tell me whether this is required of GAs
- ^ I'm not sure if this is required for GA, nor can I tell what criterion it is (possible 1a?), but I think I should probably mention it
- ^ This is part of the "duplicated" material so I'm not sure how much I should care about it
- ^ It could've been released to sales/other streaming platforms before then
- ^ Yes, it's another 1a violation I'm not sure about
Good Article review progress box
|
Background
edit"The 1975" is the first track on Notes on a Conditional Form.[11]
ref 11 doesn't support the statement. (2c)
In August 2018, Thunberg began skipping school on Fridays to protest outside the Swedish Riksdag (parliament) with a sign reading "Skolstrejk för klimatet" ("School strike for the climate"). This sparked a global school strike for climate movement in November 2018.[12]
I don't think this much detail is needed for the school climate strike, this should really only describe what Thunberg is known for (The climate strikes). (3b)
Healy later said that the band wanted to make "the most modern statement" on the opening track, and that he wanted to Thunberg to "exist formally" in pop culture.[14][15]
I have no idea why the Toronto Sun is being used as a ref here. It doesn't confirm anything listed (though ref 14 certainly does) and I'm not sure if it's a reliable source given that it is a tabloid. (2b?)
No problems currently found in the Composition and Release and Performance sections
Critical Reception
editI don't think the second paragraph needs that much quotes for us to tell that critics praised the transition from this song to "People" (3b)
Overall
editThis article does have somewhat of a focus problem. I'd put it on hold to address those problems as well as the others mentioned. Username6892 16:07, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Result: Way off, should probably improve before reviewing any other non-obvious quickfail GANs. Username6892 22:54, 31 May 2020 (UTC)