Wikipedia:Peer review/So It Goes.../archive1
| Toolbox |
|---|
 | This peer review discussion is closed. |
I've listed this article for peer review because
i'm feeling kinda ambitious and willing to promote this to fa (because yes). it may also potentially make the reputation topic on wikiproject taylor swift to be a featured topic (it's far from it, but hey, one step closer).
Thanks, brachy08 (chat here lol) 01:29, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Heartfox
[edit]Hey! This is just general advice for FAC. Not saying these are problems with this specific article, but this is something to look out for:
- Read all of the WP:MOS pages and review WP:FACR
- You're going to want to incorporate the refs listed in the talk page that haven't yet been added to the article
- Look for new references using the databases available to editors at WP:TWL, such as Newspapers.com, ProQuest, and Gale.
- Incorporate as many scholarly sources as possible (books, journal articles. search on books.google.com and scholar.google.com)
- As much as possible, the background section's references should specifically mention "So It Goes" or Reputation to align with WP:NPOV. We can't create a new narrative around a subject; we have to follow what existing sources say.
- Look for how an audio sample of the song might meet WP:NFCC
- Go through each reference again and see if the article prose matches with the source material
- The reception section should have a clear thematic structure to align with the FACR "engaging and of a professional standard" criteria. See WP:RECEPTION for ideas.
- All of the sources should be not only reliable but high quality. This means that, even when something is not being cited for a fact, you still have to demonstrate that the source itself is high-quality. Right now "So It Goes" cite Bustle and Cosmopolitan, both of which have no consensus on their reliability at WP:RSPSS. Now, even though they're being used for opinions, the fact that there is no consensus on their reliability means that they are not high-quality sources. They would have to be removed for the article to pass a FAC source review. The same would probably apply to Business Insider, Refinery29, Elite Daily, etc.
- the citations should all have a standardized capitalization and linking style.
Good luck! Heartfox (talk) 02:23, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Aoba47
[edit]According to the peer review instructions, Nominators are limited to one review at a time
. brachy08, you currently have two peer reviews open at the same time: this one and the one for "Bad Blood" (Taylor Swift song). You will have to close one of these two peer reviews. Aoba47 (talk) 17:49, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- ill close this one then. got the stuff i need from it. brachy08 (chat here lol) 23:32, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- brachy0008, before this is closed, know that the sourcing is probably going to need to be a lot stronger if it's going to make it through FAC. Right now it would probably only barely survive AfD. Very few of the sources are actually about this song, they just happen to mention it while covering the album. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 05:13, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with the above comment. brachy0008, here are the instructions on how to close a peer review. Aoba47 (talk) 01:49, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- brachy0008, before this is closed, know that the sourcing is probably going to need to be a lot stronger if it's going to make it through FAC. Right now it would probably only barely survive AfD. Very few of the sources are actually about this song, they just happen to mention it while covering the album. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 05:13, 25 July 2024 (UTC)