Talk:Everything We Need/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: VersaceSpace (talk · contribs) 16:41, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll start this momentarily. —VersaceSpace 🌃 16:41, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article is very well written, I have very few issues with it, which are as follows:

I think the RapReviews commentary could be safely removed as it's a non-notable publication, and the reviewer is employed by The Young Folks (not a notable publication either).

Not done per Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources, this website is reliable. --K. Peake 19:07, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think a Kanye picture without the MAGA hat would be more suitable in the 'release and reception' section.

Comment: are you sure this matters, as it is one of the few photos of him from 2018/19 period? --K. Peake 19:07, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think a less divisive picture would be better, but if there's no alternative, I suppose this is fine. My fear is that to readers this might read as snide or "shady" towards Ye —VersaceSpace 🌃 19:16, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a reason why the website paramater of ref 28 says Billboard Pro and not just Billboard?

This is because it is from the pro version of Billboard, which is subscription access only. --K. Peake 19:07, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm aware of that fact, but is it not the same publication? I've never seen Billboard cited this way. —VersaceSpace 🌃 19:18, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Citations stand alone in their usage so I think the website names can be wiki-linked in every possible citation.

Not done since this would cause users who interpret WP:OVERLINK differently to say the sources are overlinked --K. Peake 19:07, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is there something specific that the Hip hop-n-More cite is referencing, which is not being taken care of by the Highsnobiety citation? If not then ref 5 can be removed.

Ref 5 gives the month of the leak as well as who was featured on vocals. --K. Peake 19:07, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On hold, but this is very good. —VersaceSpace 🌃 17:13, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

VersaceSpace Thanks for your comments, I have responded to them above. --K. Peake 19:07, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Kyle Peake: I've responded to (two of) yours. —VersaceSpace 🌃 19:19, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@VersaceSpace: I have replaced the photo of West with one I now found actually from 2019 after you elaborated on your point, however I'll elaborate on the Billboard one that Pro is only in brackets so isn't that acceptable? --K. Peake 19:38, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think "pro" should be in that parameter at all. The subscription is called Billboard Pro, but the website and publication are still just Billboard. That the subscription is named doesn't mean it's a part of the website's name. —VersaceSpace 🌃 19:50, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

VersaceSpace Big kudos to you for that explanation; I have removed pro altogether now. --K. Peake 20:19, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. All the issues I raised have been addressed now, so I'll ✓ Pass this! —VersaceSpace 🌃 20:26, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]