Wikipedia:Peer review/Papa Don't Preach/archive1

Papa Don't Preach

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for March 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because, it had recently passed its GA nomination, and the reviewer thinks that it could become a featured article. I believe it have the potential since all the major aspects are covered and most of the references are reliable if not all of them. My biggest concern is the prose and grammar, since one of the requirements is that the prose must be "engaging, even brilliant, and of a professional standard". English is not my first language so is a little difficult for me to see the mistakes. Any suggestions and comments would be appreciated. Thanks, Frcm1988 (talk) 21:54, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Ealdgyth (talk · contribs)

• You said you wanted to know what to work on before taking to FAC, so I looked at the sourcing and referencing with that in mind. I reviewed the article's sources as I would at FAC.
• Please spell out abbreviations in the notes. Yes, they are linked, but you don't want your readers to leave your article, they might never return.
• What makes Berger, Arthur Asa (2002). The Art of the Seductress: Techniques of the Great Seductresses from Biblical Times to the Postmodern Era. iUniverse. ISBN 0595230776 a reliable source? iUniverse is a self-pubishing company.

Hope this helps. Please note that I don't watchlist Peer Reviews I've done. If you have a question about something, you'll have to drop a note on my talk page to get my attention. (My watchlist is already WAY too long, adding peer reviews would make things much worse.) 21:49, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Comments from Smallman12q (talk · contribs)

• Its very well sourced, has pictures in a number of sections, and doesn't appear to have an edit wars going on. Seems ready for FA review.
• My only comment is that it seems that more projects could be applicable...but I'm not quite sure which. Good luck with the FA review!Smallman12q (talk) 15:10, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: This is a most interesting article and an enjoyable read. It still needs a bit of polish. I did some light copyediting as I went, and I have further suggestions for improvement, as follows:

Lead

• Wikilink remixed for readers unfamiliar with the jargon?
• "The song was released as the album's second single in mid-1986, and was a commercial success, becoming Madonna's fourth number-one on the Billboard Hot 100, also performing well internationally, reaching the top position in Australia and the United Kingdom." - Probably too complex. It might be better to subdivide. Suggestion: "Released as the album's second single in mid-1986, the song was a commercial success. It became Madonna's fourth number-one on the Billboard Hot 100 and performed well internationally, reaching the top position in Australia and the United Kingdom."

Music and lyrics

• "a moderate tempo of 116 beats per minute. The song is written in the key of F minor, an unusual choice for a pop song, as it is commonly used in classical music, like Beethoven's Appassionata Sonata. This inclusion produce a combination between pop and classical rhythms, which is clearly underlined by the instrumentation during the song's introduction." - I found this a bit confusing. The tempo, it seems to me, might contribute to something between pop and classical rhythms, but the key would have nothing to do with the rhythms. Or am I wrong? Maybe something like this would be better: "a moderate tempo of 116 beats per minute. The tempo helped produce a combination of rhythms somewhere between pop and classical, which is clearly expressed by the instrumentation during the song's introduction. In addition, the song was written in the key of F minor, an unusual choice for a pop song, but common in classical music such as Beethoven's Appassionata Sonata." Or something like that.
• "Lyrically the song shows Madonna's interest at the time in her Roman Catholic upbringing" - Delete "at the time"?
• "as the song theme is about a teenage girl who admits to her father that she is pregnant, and that she refuses to have an abortion or give up the baby" - Not quite grammatical. Suggestion: "... who admits to her father that she is pregnant and refuses to have an abortion or give up the baby"
• "despite of what her friends are telling her to do" - Delete "of"?

Reception

• ""if there is a problem with the album, is the lack of outstanding songs" - Is the word "it" missing from the quote?

Music video

• "Alternating it with shots of a sexier Madonna with a more toned and muscular body, cropped platinum blonde hair, and a figure-revealing clothing, consisting of a 1960s-style black bustier top and capri pants." - This sentence lacks a verb. Suggestion: "The video alternated between tomboy shots and those of a sexier Madonna with a more toned and muscular body, cropped platinum blonde hair, and figure-revealing clothing, consisting of a 1960s-style black bustier top and capri pants."
• "and the photography was in charge of Michael Ballhaus" - Doubtful. How about "and Michael Ballhaus was in charge of the photography"?

Cover versions

• "The song has been sampled at the beginning of Mario Winans' 2004 single 'Never Really Was', and a slowed down version samples Keshia Chante's 2006 single 'Fallen'." - The last part of this doesn't seem to make sense. Doesn't the Chante single sample the Madonna song? Perhaps "... a slowed-down version by Keshia Chante samples the song in the 2006 single, 'Fallen'... "?

Formats and track listing

• The Manual of Style advises against using bold letters except in the first line of the lead for the article title and in the section heads. I think that the bolding of "7" Single" and the other items in this section should be in regular type.

Images

• The second and third image, especially the second, would be better if positioned on the right so that Madonna looks into the page rather than out. The reader's eyes will follow Madonna's.
  • Done --Legolas ^(talktome) 04:13, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog. That is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 04:56, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Efe comments

• The sample File:PapaDon't Preach-KellyOsbourne.ogg fails to satisfy WP:NFCC #8. It only supports the literally the presence of the cover in the article. There's no technical/musical info included about the cover therefore the sample has no use. --Efe (talk) 07:35, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Commented out untill any info is added. --Legolas ^(talktome) 04:13, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I have no problem removing it, but are you sure the cover versions need the technical/musical info. For example "What You Waiting For?" and "Smells Like Teen Spirit" both have samples of the cover versions that only have the musical style. Frcm1988 (talk) 20:58, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Suggest to remove the table for the certifications because it only consist of two entries. Better merge it to the prose. That section also makes the TOC long. --Efe (talk) 07:35, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Table removed, also removed the titles. Frcm1988 (talk) 20:58, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• The section is not at all controversy. Perhaps change it to criticisms or interpretation? --Efe (talk) 07:35, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done changed to Criticism from women's groups --Legolas ^(talktome) 04:13, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I changed it to Reaction to the song's theme, but Im not sure about it. Frcm1988 (talk) 20:58, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• "It then spent three consecutive weeks at the top, fifteen weeks in total" the dependent clause makes the sentence unclear. It looks like that single spent fifteen weeks at the top spot, non-consecutively. --Efe (talk) 07:35, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Clarified. Frcm1988 (talk) 20:58, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• "Across the rest of Europe, "Papa Don't Preach" also" I think the "across the rest" needs rephrasing because if that's the intro, the succeeding clause must be a generalization of the single's performance like "Across the rest of Europe, the single also reached the top ten" and then perhaps the next clause would be "including the Belgium, Ireland, Italy, and Norway". King of that effect. By the way, Eurochart Hot 100 represents the entire Europe so treatment to that must not be included in the regional charts. --Efe (talk) 07:35, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Changed. Frcm1988 (talk) 20:58, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• "For the music video Madonna did a complete image makeover." "did" can be replaced with specific word like "sported" or any word you like. --Efe (talk) 07:35, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Changed. Frcm1988 (talk) 20:58, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for your comments. Frcm1988 (talk) 20:58, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]