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

Reviewer: Esprit15d (talk · contribs) 01:23, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Hello! I will be reviewing this article. Best of wishes on your nomination.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 01:23, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• For this, Stannard and Rowe flew to Nashville, Tennessee to meet the group.: Did we ever establish who Stannard and Rowe are in the body of the article? If not, this needs to be done, preferably with full names and also their role in music and/or the group.

@Esprit15d:  Fixed Alex ^talk 16:19, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm stopping for the night, but I'll return with more comments.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 02:35, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• @Esprit15d and 11JORN: Hey. This seems to have stalled. Any chance we can get it moving again? AIRcorn (talk) 20:24, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and you have my apologies. I will get started on it again.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 02:34, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Esprit15d, in fairness, I think you need to consider whether you'll be able to give this review the proper attention it needs. We're two weeks from the end of the year. If you haven't been able to do significant work on the review before 2019 is over, it will probably be time to withdraw in favor of someone else. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:05, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's past time to turn this review over to someone who can put in the time (one review-based comment nearly four months ago is not sufficient); the nomination was made in January 2019, and it's now January 2020. I'll put up a header for a new reviewer; I'm asking one of the regular GA reviewers if they're willing to take over. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:10, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New reviewer

Hi, I'll continue reviewing this. Kingsif (talk) 23:16, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Copyvio check shows heavy quoting, but looks fine.Kingsif (talk) 22:49, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The only exceeding source carries a citation. Alex ^talk 00:19, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• History and talk show article is stable
• Lead a little on the longer side but fine
• How is the music video image being used specifically? It's fair use, but I can't see it really fulfilling the rationale for inclusion?
• Similarly, what purpose does including 27 seconds of the song serve?

Do you want me to remove the audio sample or reduce it? I think it's very useful for people who read the article. Alex ^talk 00:19, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@11JORN: The purpose of including the audio isn't clear, if you could explain why it's included, it could stay. Kingsif (talk) 00:44, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Otherwise, the media is good
• End of the lead should be rephrased - they weren't promoting the song in their 2019 tour, over 20 years after it was commercially successful.
• Why are Mel B and Melanie C given their full names and not their common names?
• Is the sentence In a similar vein, Chuck Taylor of Billboard commented that "this ballad follows in the spirit of 'Too Much'". necessary? I feel that rephrasing would work better - people expect some original comment when it's introduced with 'in a simialr vein' - so maybe "Chuck Taylor of Billboard agreed that it "follows in the spirit of Too Much"." would be better.
• Joe O'Brien's sentence in Composition is more review than a note on its composition; "nails the wintry ballad sound" is the only bit that's kind of relevant
  • Everything after this in that section is reviews.
• Critical reception section seems good
• In Chart performance: It established a record for them as the first act to have three consecutive Christmas number-one singles since The Beatles in 1965 - is it a record if someone (the Beatles) has already done it? This is an awkward phrasing anyway, so that first part should be removed.
• Tagged for update from 2017 record sales. They toured with it in 2019, sales likely had a boost, this should be reflected.

I unfortunately didn't find updated sales figures. Alex ^talk 00:19, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Made some tweaks, generally for style concerns
• Sources look fine
• on hold Concerns above, mostly on copyrighted media use. Kingsif (talk) 23:22, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kingsif: Thank you for reviewing. I have addressed some issues, take a look. Alex ^talk 00:19, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@11JORN: Looks good, just the question on the audio, comment above. Kingsif (talk) 00:44, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kingsif: I decided to remove the audio sample. Alex ^talk 00:47, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, okay, I guess that makes it simpler. Nice work, passes. Kingsif (talk) 00:57, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]