Second Nature (Rush song) has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones Date Process Result April 8, 2025 Good article nominee Listed

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Songs This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong Progressive Rock Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Progressive Rock, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Progressive rock on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Progressive RockWikipedia:WikiProject Progressive RockTemplate:WikiProject Progressive RockProgressive rock Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Pop music Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Regional and national music Low‑importance Second Nature (Rush song) is within the scope of the Regional and national music task force, an attempt at building a resource on the music of all the peoples and places of the world. Please visit the project's listing to see the article's assessment and to help us improve the article as we push to 1.0.Regional and national musicWikipedia:WikiProject Regional and national musicTemplate:WikiProject Regional and national musicRegional and national music Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The image Image:Rush Hold Your Fire.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --21:51, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Second Nature (Rush song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: HumanxAnthro (talk · contribs) 19:50, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 10:14, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):

   b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a. (reference section):

   b. (citations to reliable sources):

   c. (OR):

   d. (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a. (major aspects):

   b. (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):

   b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/fail:

(Criteria marked are unassessed)

I will have this one completed by tomorrow! --K. Peake 10:14, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Write January–April 1987 in the recorded parameter since these months are fully sourced
  • That refers to the period of the entirety of the album, not the specific song. That narrows down the possible date, sure, but it is not definite that song was recorded all throughout that period. That is why there is only the year. Would adding a "circa" be fine? User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 12:36, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Remove the world Studio after the names of them in the infobox because the parameter having that name makes it redundant
  • Fixed User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 12:38, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Remove pop rock from genres since this is only the chorus, not a genre of the song completely
  • Great comments in general so far, don't get me wrong, but I would need some elaboration here since this is a bit startling. I'm not sure where in MOS it states to not list a genre just because under 100% of the song does not fall under it. A chorus is the most essential part of the song, and "Second Nature" has two-and-a-half choruses, which is a good chunk. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 12:36, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• The exact release date is not needed in the lead, instead place a comma after twelfth studio album and add the album's release year in brackets at the end
  • Done User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 12:17, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "Its lyrics were penned by" → "The song was penned by" and remove "music" before composer credits, although there should be a clause before one of the later usages of and in this sentence
  • Fixed User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 12:18, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Remove the song's length since this information is not notable for the lead
  • Removed User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 12:17, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Because this is the lead, remove speech marks around open letter
  • Done User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 12:17, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "It was left out" → "The song was left out"
  • Fixed it. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 12:17, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Link critics to Music journalism
  • It is. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 12:17, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "bland and unexceptional." → "bland, and unexceptional."
  • Done User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 12:17, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• This may be a stylistic preference from me, but shouldn't you introduce the record as "the 1987 album Hold Your Fire" in the first sentence rather than adding the year in brackets since this reads confusingly?
  • I just removed the wikilink and year bracket. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 19:22, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "by guitarist Alex Lifeson and" → "by guitarist Alex Lifeson, and"
  • Done User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 19:22, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Remove the wikilink and release year of Power Windows in the second para, as this information is already established
  • Done User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 19:25, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• [5] does not source the January to April 1987 recording dates
  • The liner notes I just replaced the citation with do. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 19:25, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "These include Oxford's" → "These included Oxford's"
  • Done User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 19:25, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Remove overly obvious wikilink on Toronto
  • Done User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 19:25, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Same as above for wikilinks on New York and Paris
  • Fixed User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 19:27, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "on September 8, 1987 with" → "on September 8, 1987, with"
  • Fixed tour. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 19:27, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Mention that this was the album's promotional tour to specify
  • Uh....... it does. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 19:27, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Remove the audio sample's wikilink on soft rock to avoid WP:SEAOFBLUE
  • Done User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 19:37, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Shouldn't you write out in prose "Second Nature" has a length of four-minutes and 35 seconds (4:35)?
  • It's MUCH simplier to present the length like this. Spelling it out makes the sentence much longer to read, and I've had complaints about long sentence lengths from a GA reviewer for Making Memories (Rush song).
• [7][3] are out of order; [3] is the one that mentions the length which is listed first
  • That was the aforementioned website source I removed. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 19:37, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Wouldn't "akin to" be more suitable language than "a la"?
  • You know, good point. Done User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 19:37, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "section and arranged with strings, "evocative" → "section, with the arrangement consisting of strings, "evocative" to be more clear since the clause's usage is not immediately recognized here as to what the quote's link is to the arrangement
  • Done User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 19:38, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "interpreted both it and" → "interpreted both the song and"
  • Fixed. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 19:37, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Wikilink electronic music to itself instead of the music production link, which is obviously more recognizable
  • Done User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 19:37, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "Analyzed Alex Body, the production" → "Analyzed by Alex Body, the production"
  • Done User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 19:37, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Img looks good!
• Would "bigger picture" make more sense as a phrase here than "big picture"?
  • May I personally ask the reason for this specific choice? Using "big pictures" seems to give the same message. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 13:05, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "to accept limitations."" should only keep the punctuation inside speech marks if the source ends the quote with a full-stop at this point
  • Done User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 13:06, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Wikilink classic liberalism to itself instead
  • Done User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 13:05, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "cooperation and communication of" → "cooperation, and communication of"
  • Done User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 13:05, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Shouldn't you write something like the staff of Circus for the first sentence?
  • Doesn't just mentioning the name imply that? User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 13:08, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Add the name of the publication Bob Darden is from
  • Done User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 13:08, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "over this one."" → "over this one"." per MOS:QUOTE
  • This is a full quote, though, not a partial one. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 13:08, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "bland and boring" → "bland, and boring"
  • Done User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 13:16, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• The words unremarkable and average are widely recognized, so do not need speech marks
  • Well, quote-marks removed then. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 13:16, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "hated the "mind-bogglingly cheesy" "garbage" around it." → "hated the surrounding "mind-bogglingly cheesy ... garbage"."
  • Word changed. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 13:16, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "called it and" → "called the song and"
  • Done User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 13:16, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "Body lauded the "impressive musical use of light" → "Body was impressed with the musical aspects of "light" to avoid overquoting
  • "musical use of light and shade" is not an objective descriptor in music. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 13:16, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "to Lifeson who... nope, he doesn't wake up"." → "to Lifeson", who does not seem to wake up."
  • This is a humorous comment. It is not meant to be written like this. He's actually criticizing the guitars for not coming to the forefront, such as with a solo. It is the best to present it as a quote. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 13:17, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Use {{spaced ndash}} so there is the right space between credits and personnel
  • Done User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 21:04, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Copyvio score looks great at 23.7%!!!
• Per lack of a clear editorial oversite and the credits page saying it even quotes from Wikipedia, is rush.com reliable for refs 3 and 5?
  • What?! The Rush website uses Wikipedia too? What is it with official band pages having to rely on Wikipedia for info on artists they're supposed to represent> Anyway, goods catch. Let me look for a newspaper source clarifying the release date. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie)
    • Fixed. The album liner notes has replaced both sources. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 00:03, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Wikilink Voyageur Press on ref 8 per MOS:LINK2SECT
  • Oversight. Thanks for catching that! Fixed. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 12:27, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Link Backbeat Books to Bloomsbury Publishing on ref 9
  • Thanks. Done. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 12:27, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• If you are only wikilinking Newspapers.com once, do this on ref 12 instead
  • Another oversight. Thanks for catching! Anyway, done User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 12:27, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Regarding the above, wikilinking more than once needs to be consistent for all sources – if you follow doing this, then remove wikilinks on ECW Press for ref 21 and Ultimate Classic Rock for ref 29
  • Nope. I intended to link once for all. I also caught Rowman and Littlefield. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 12:27, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• On hold until all of the issues are fixed; done right on time today! --K. Peake 11:15, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• HumanxAnthro You still need to write the staff of Circus because it is too vague to say a publication simply wrote something and as for the MOS:QUOTE issues where you mentioned it was the end of the sentence, I meant you should only place punctuation inside when a complete sentence is quoted. --K. Peake 19:35, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Fixed. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 21:04, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Pass now, you have done a solid job of implementing these changes! --K. Peake 07:04, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]