Talk:Fuck Them All/GA2

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: Hahc21 (talk · contribs) 02:08, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Review

Lead

• Seems to be good. I'll revisit it later.

Background and composition

• "as it sounded like too direct a provocation" → "as it sounded too much like a direct provocation"—Is this what it's supposed to mean?

Yes. --Europe22 (talk) 21:48, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

• This: "It was also the singer's first song to be available as a digital download," and this: "and was released as a single twice: first, the CD single on 14 March, then the CD maxi and the vinyl, which contain the remixes, on 18 April."

• The issue: First, nowehere the sentence says when the dowload was made available. Second: the second phrase says the single was released twice, on 14 March and 18 April. And the digital download? If we count the digital download, there were three releases, not two.
• Another issue: 14 March and 18 April of which year?—2005 i guess—It must be written.

• "The photo for the cover was taken by Robin". Who is Robin?

I don't know who is Robin. The source does not provide any further information on him/her. --Europe22 (talk) 21:48, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Music and lyrics

• I'm not totally sure why the beginning of the song needs a quote box.

I removed it. --Europe22 (talk) 21:48, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Music video

• "9 March" add year.
• "snow,[21] a horse,[22] and some crows.[23]" Move all refs to the end of the sentence.
• "Then we understand how the other woman was killed" → "Then, it is shown how the other woman was killed."
• Erwan Chuberre is from Tele Star? Clarify this so that the reader doesn't need to go and check the refs to se wether he is or not from Tele Star.

No E.C. is not from Tele Star. --Europe22 (talk) 21:48, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

• "wrote: "This a coherent video," → ""wrote: "This is a coherent video,"

Promotion and live performances

• "The song was never performed on television" → "The song has yet to be performed on television". You can't say never until the world ends. I mean, she can perform the song in the future, nothing stops her from doing it, so, writing that she never performed the song or that the song was never performed is wrong.
• "but was sung during the 2006 series of concert at Bercy." → "Notwithstanding, she performed it in 2006 on a series of concerts at Bercy."

Critical reception

• Good.

Chart performance

• Add year to all dates, such as "3 April".
• "In France, released only as a CD single on 14 March 2005, "Fuck Them All" entered the chart at number two five weeks later, after selling 26,688 units,[43] being unable to dislodge Ilona Mitrecey's hit "Un Monde parfait" which topped the chart then" → Move the reference to the end of the statement. Also, add a comma after "Un Monde parfait", and change "topped the chart then" to "topped the chart that week".
• "Élia Habib, an expert on the French charts". The statement says that Habib is an expert that works on the French charts. I think it shouldn't say that, so better write it as this: "Élia Habib, an expert on French charts".
• "The record's chart position began to fall again, it remained in the top 50 for eleven weeks then left the top 100 after 19 weeks." → "Then, the song started to fall again off the chart, remaining in the top 50 for 11 weeks and on the top 100 for 19 weeks."

Nothing else. After those issues are solved, i'll continue with the references. On hold by now. Regards. —Hahc21 20:50, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi Hahc21! I tried to fix all the issues listed above, and I hope that all is correct now. Regards. NB: FYI, my English is not very good, as I'm not a native speaker of this language. --Europe22 (talk) 21:48, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Haha don't worry; me neither, but I have some years speakign english as my 2nd lang. —Hahc21 21:59, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Verdict

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: 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):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Good work. —Hahc21 21:59, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much! --Europe22 (talk) 20:20, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.