Comment - is this an American-English or British-English article? Considering its on a British artist's album, should it not consistently be the latter? Parrotof Doom 15:24, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it should all be in British-English. Are there more that I have missed?
You should change all the dates to 1 January 1960 (for example), rather than January 1, 1960. Parrotof Doom 20:06, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Still a few left. Look for January, March, and December Parrotof Doom 20:42, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Got them all now, I think. Pyrrhus16 21:47, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Following the release of Thriller and the singles that accompanied it" - what singles?
Listed the singles released.
It isn't really necessary to individually list those singles - you just need to say that the singles came from Thriller.
Changed to "Following the release of Thriller and most of the singles that accompanied the album, "Say Say Say..."
""It remained atop Billboard's Hot 100 for six weeks and became Jackson's seventh top ten hit in a year" - in a 12-month period, or a specific year?
In a specific year. I've changed to "It remained atop Billboard's Hot 100 for six weeks and became Jackson's seventh top ten hit in a year (1983), which broke a record that had previously been jointly held by The Beatles and Elvis Presley."
"The song had initially peaked at number ten in the UK and was slowly dropping in the charts" - several charts are mentioned. In which chart was it dropping?
Attempted to clarify and changed to "The song had initially peaked at number ten in the UK and was slowly dropping in the British chart."
Ok I've copyedited it slightly, please do check to see that I haven't substantially altered the meaning of those sentences. Parrotof Doom 20:12, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, you haven't. It's all good. Pyrrhus16 21:30, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"An early weekday television interview was subsequently held with McCartney after the single's decline in the charts" - repetition of "single's decline" from previous sentence (above)
"Say Say Say" reached number one in Norway and Sweden, and the single was also in the top ten of Austria, Australia, New Zealand, the Netherlands and Switzerland" - top ten of what? Countries? Or charts?
Noted that it was in the top ten of the charts.
"Salon.com later described the song as a "sappy duet". They concluded that McCartney had become a "wimpy old fart"" - They - who is they? You mention only Salon.com in this sentence.
Changed to "Writers for Salon.com..."
I changed this to "Salon.com ...etc... The online magazine concluded..." When asking who "they" were, I was implying that "they" is an "it" :) Parrotof Doom 20:18, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
" Billboard ranked the song as the third top song of the year in their list of top tracks for 1984" - as above, but this time their
Changed to "its".
"The magazine Vibe listed "Say Say Say" as the 22nd greatest duet of all time in a 2007 article" - greatest duet of all time in a 2007 article - don't you mean "in a 2007 article...greatest duo of all time"?
Put "In a 2007 article" at the start of the sentence.
"It was filmed in Los Olivos, Santa Ynez Valley, California, where Paul McCartney had to fly out to Michael Jackson as the younger singer's schedule was busy." - this reads as though McCartney was in Los Olivos, and then had to fly from there to an unnamed destination to see Jackson
Tried to clarify. Changed to "It was filmed in Los Olivos, Santa Ynez Valley, California, where a residing Michael Jackson had Paul McCartney fly to, as the younger singer's schedule was busy."
I adjusted it slightly, its difficult to rephrase without knowing from where McCartney departed. Does the citation provide that? Parrotof Doom 20:29, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Great rewording. And no, the source doesn't say where McCartney departed from. Pyrrhus16 21:30, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"The video cost the singers $500,000 to make." - who specifically paid for the video, as it seems likely they paid via their production/management?
Not entirely sure who specifically paid for it; the source just says "the singers paid". I've dropped "the singers" from the sentence just to be on the safe side.
Probably the best thing, it made it sound as though they opened their wallets and paid everyone direct. Its more likely it was paid for by their various companies. Parrotof Doom 20:29, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"In the short film" - what short film? This is the first time this is mentioned. Needs clarifying.
Added "The music video (or 'short film')" to the first sentence in the section.
It's a little clunky but better. I wonder if anything can be made of the fact that it was longer than most videos of the time? Parrotof Doom 20:29, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Upon its debut, the National Coalition of Television Violence classified the music video as too violent to be aired." - where did it debut, and in what jurisdiction does this censor operate?
I've added where they are headquartered.
That's a little too "American" for my taste. Others may disagree, including yourself (and I wouldn't hold it against you) but I would be happy with just "the US National..." Parrotof Doom 20:29, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Authors later reviewed the short film and documented two central themes" - Several authors, some authors, US authors - otherwise "Authors" alone sounds like a surname. Parrotof Doom 15:42, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to "A pair of authors", as only two appear to have documented the themes. Thank you for your comments. :) Pyrrhus16 16:45, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A pair implies a link of some kind, so I changed it to "two" if that's ok. Parrotof Doom 20:29, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's great. Thanks. Pyrrhus16 21:30, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Journalist Geoffrey Giuliano wrote that McCartney stated that the song was written by he and Jackson on the top floor of the musicians' London office. The older singer supposedly said, "I just grabbed a guitar and 'Say Say Say' came out of it. [Michael] helped with a lot of the words on that actually."" - this sounds as though we don't quite trust Geoffrey Giuliano. Is there any reason to suspect that what he wrote may not have happened? Parrotof Doom 21:16, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
According to this section of his biography, many of his books are controversial and thought by some to be sensationalized. This appears to be backed up by some of the online reviews and comments on his books, like this for example. Pyrrhus16 21:30, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If that's the case then it may be worth finding another source. If that isn't possible, I'd remove it altogether if I felt it was unreliable. Your call. Parrotof Doom 20:44, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed it, as no other source seems to mention it and I'm not too sure about the author's reliability. Pyrrhus16 21:47, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
