Talk:Otis (song)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Otis (song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Rp0211 (talk · contribs) 17:37, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

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:

Infobox

• Fix issues with image, according to the image talk page

Lead

• Fix disambiguation issue with "posthumous" according to this

Both have been done.

• "Otis" is a song by American hip hop artists Kanye West and Jay-Z, from their first collaborative album Watch the Throne. → Put year in parentheses for album

Done

• The track was released as the second single off of Watch the Throne on July 20th, 2011. → Get rid of "th" in "July 20th, 2011"

Done

Background and release

• No issues

Composition

• According to [{WP:SAMPLE]], audio recordings have to be 10% or less than the original recording (it needs to be 18.1 seconds or less and is currently 30 seconds)

New sample added

• "Otis" is 2:58 long and is a mid-tempo hip-hop song.[8] → Change "2:58" to "two minutes and fifty-eight seconds"

Done

Critical reception

• No issues

Remixes

• Fix disambiguation issue with "DMX" according to this

Done

Music video

• No issues

Live performances

• No issues

Chart performance

• No issues

Charts

• No issues

References

OVERALL REVIEW OF SECTION: Make sure you proofread this section; here are issues I found with the first twenty references to serve as a guide.

• Reference 2 → Wiki-link "Rolling Stone"
• References 3, 12, 34 → Dead links according to this
• Reference 4 → "MTV" should not be italicized; "MTV" and "Viacom" should be wiki-linked
• Reference 8 → "Apple Inc" should not be italicized and should be wiki-linked
• Reference 11 → "Pitchfork Media" should not be wiki-linked
• Reference 12 → Fix source date formatting; Publisher of publication should be included
• Reference 13 → Fix source date formatting; "Complex (magazine)" should be "Complex"; "Complex" should not be wiki-linked
• Reference 14 → Fix source date formatting; "MTV" should not be italicized; Fix retrieved date formatting
• Reference 15 → Publisher is needed; Fix retrieved date formatting
• Reference 16 → Fix retrieved date formatting; Wiki-link "NME"
• References 17, 18 → Publisher is needed
• Reference 20 → "Chicago Tribune" needs to be wiki-linked

All have been covered I believe.

After thoroughly reviewing this article, I have decided to put it on hold at this time. I will give you the general seven days to fix these issues and/or address issues which you believe do not affect good article status. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask. Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 18:30, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

While you addressed the issues above, you need to proofread the references section for issues, which I can still see for references past the first twenty. Once you have those issues fixed, then I will feel confident passing the article. Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 19:43, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

I have gone through the entire reference section thoroughly and have corrected quite a few things, if there is anything I have missed instruct me further to correct. Bruce Campbell (talk) 21:10, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Awesome job with correcting the issues with the "References" section. Now that all issues have been addressed, I feel confident passing this article. Congratulations and keep up the good work! Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 21:28, 25 June 2012 (UTC)