Talk:"Slut!"/GA1
GA Review
[edit]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.
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Skyshifter (talk · contribs) 00:14, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Will begin soon. Skyshiftertalk 00:14, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
General comments
[edit]- Image and audio files have valid fair use rationales
- No copyvio — the link at the top just copies from this article. Other sources are slightly high for citing the song's own lyrics, which is fine.
Infobox and lead
[edit]- Ok
Background
[edit]- Ok
Release
[edit]- I am unsure if the last paragraph should be here. I think it would fit best in "Background". "Release" should only talk about the 1989 (Taylor's Version)-related aspect of the release, IMO.
- Added to a new section called "Release and commercial performance".
- I've added a missing exclamation mark.
- Thanks!
Production and lyrics
[edit]- You joined three references for the "a gentle and tender track" sentence (2nd para), but didn't for the "intense romance" (3rd para) sentence. I think that should be consistent.
- Done.
- The lyric [...] drew comparisons to the lyrics [...] of "Blank Space" [...] - you should say that Bailey is the one who compared the lyrics
- Added more references to show that Bailey is not the only one.
Reception
[edit]- Barnes proceeds -> Barnes proceeded
- Tweaked.
- shouting "'Slut!'" -> I think this should be just be shouting "Slut!" because it refers to the word, not the title of the song?
- You're right. Fixed.
- reached at number three remove "at"
- Done.
Other sections
[edit]- "Credits and personnel", "Charts", "Certifications" and "Release history" are fine. I've added a missing exclamation mark for "Certifications".
- All references are properly formatted. I've noticed you wrote %22Slut!%22 for the title in some chart templates because the URL needs those. I'm not sure what is the best course of action here. I think that formatting those references manually instead of using {{single chart}} would be the best solution.
Spot-check
[edit]Randomly chose 13, 20, 24, 26, 35, 37,42, 48. All of them check out, except for 20 - it does confirm that the media portrayed Swift as a "serial dater", but it doesn't mention "following a series of publicized romances with other male celebrities".
- Added sources to the ref #20.
On hold Skyshiftertalk 23:43, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- Should be done now. Thanks for the review :) @Skyshifter: Ippantekina (talk) 04:34, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- The %22Slut!%22 thing was not done, however I think it's minor. Note that for FA this change will probably be necessary. I am going to ✓ Pass this article now, congratulations! Skyshiftertalk 10:43, 5 March 2024 (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.