Talk:Forever & Always/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: ErnestKrause (talk · contribs) 00:52, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Start review process with a few comments. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:52, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(1) TOC does not match up with your other GAN nomination at this time. Should the section titles correspond with your other nomination. Is it "Chart performance" or "Commercial performance"?

Similarly, should there be a "Credits and personnel" section as you included one in your companion nomination? ErnestKrause (talk) 15:21, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The digital album booklet only lists the writer and producer, so there is no need for that section. Ippantekina (talk) 02:14, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(2) "Fallen relationships" in lead section does not seem to be the expected vernacular expression here. The more common phrases seem to be "relationship gone sour" or "relationship falling through" or "falling out of love". Could a more common form be used?

Done Ippantekina (talk) 02:17, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(3) Background section. "Swift described the fallout..." might look better as "Swift described the personal emotional fallout...".

That is wordy. Ippantekina (talk) 05:07, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What kind of "fallout"? Publicity fallout? Personal fallout? Emotional fallout? ErnestKrause (talk) 15:21, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It specifically says "fallout of that relationship". Ippantekina (talk) 02:13, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(4) Background section. "Jonas on blast" might be elaborated. It seems that she tried to publicly denounce him, and then she regretted having gone too far in doing this. Could you add some explanatory text to this. Is she often involved in over-reaction to set-backs? ErnestKrause (talk) 00:52, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This part relates to the part mentioning her first appearance on Ellen. Ippantekina (talk) 05:07, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Need some elaboration in the article. If Swift was just using Ellen as a publicity vehicle, then this should be stated. If this type of public denouncing is expected of Swift by her fan base, then this should be stated. Your current version says "Jonas on blast" which does not sound like an elaboration nor does it sound encyclopedic. If it was done for promotional purposes, then state this. ErnestKrause (talk) 15:21, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I do not get what you are trying to say. It is clear that she called out Jonas on Ellen in 2008 ("the boy who...") and apologized for it in 2021. What else is there to say? Ippantekina (talk) 02:17, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(5) Composition section. "Hinted at her subsequent songs..." seems to want to infer that she would use the theme again and revisit it in later songs. "Revisit the theme..." seems more to the point that "Hinted at...". Maybe give an example or two of her doing this, that is, name the later songs.

Done Ippantekina (talk) 02:17, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(6) Live performance section. "Mock interview... threw an armchair down the stairs"... If these are just antics she uses for fulfill audience expectations then this should be stated. In its current phrasing, it sounds like Swift is portrayed as having a tendency for over-acting?

What do you mean by this? Ippantekina (talk) 05:07, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What is the purpose of a "mock interview"? Was she acting out personal hostilities? Was it a publicity stunt to attract attention? Does she do "mock interviews" often in her career? ErnestKrause (talk) 15:21, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Now this is pretty overboard. I do not get why you want me to get into rather trivial details. "Mock interview" was part of the performance. Ippantekina (talk) 02:13, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(7) Chart performance section. Or is this in lieu of a Commercial performance section? It might be nice to add a comment of two about how this single did compared to some of the other singles released on this album. There is a absence of comparisons in this section.

Why do we need to compare this song with other album tracks? Ippantekina (talk) 05:07, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relative standing of individual songs is normally an important part of an artist's history. Was it her best it ever? If not her best hit ever, then was it her second best hit? Was it somewhere in the middle in terms of sales and similar to most other releases by her? Need some elaboration. ErnestKrause (talk) 15:21, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What? People can get that at Taylor Swift singles discography. Ippantekina (talk) 02:13, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That should get things started. There was also an answer to your Talk message on my user page a few days ago. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:52, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review. I have responded to some of your comments above. Ippantekina (talk) 05:07, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Need to see some of this added to the article. Some of the items above are unanswered. ErnestKrause (talk) 15:21, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Responded above. Ippantekina (talk) 02:17, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concluding: Article is straightforward with about 3 dozen formatted cites and images are all from Wikicommons. It seems to be part of the growing number of companion Wikipedia articles for Taylor Swift. Passing. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:11, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]