This review is transcluded from Talk:Mean (song)/GA3. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Medxvo (talk · contribs) 22:25, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: CatchMe (talk · contribs) 06:39, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Let's go!!! CatchMe (talk · contribs) 06:39, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yaasss!!! Thank you! Medxvo (talk) 15:25, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• "praised the production as airy and catchy; a few considered the narrative ineffective" - is the semicolon necessary? "while others considered the narrative ineffective" could work.
• "The track reached the national charts of Australia, Canada, and the United States, peaking at number two on the country charts in both Canada and the United States." - "The track reached the national charts of Australia, Canada, and the United States, peaking at number two in the latter two." is simpler.
  • It peaked at number two on the country music charts of the latter two.... Would "peaking at number two on the country music charts of the latter two countries" be a good option? I added "music" after "country" this time to avoid confusion. Medxvo (talk) 01:55, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oh... my bad, I didn't understand that lol. Yes, that's a good option. CatchMe (talk · contribs) 06:19, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• "along with other awards and nominations" or something similar could be placed after the Grammy nom in the lead.

• On second thought, ""Mean" won [...] other industry awards and nominations" reads off. It could be "and also received other industry awards and nominations". CatchMe (talk · contribs) 06:19, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• "who chastised her following her off-key performance at the 2010 Grammy Awards" - is the "off-key" part a *fact*?
  • I only added it because the two sources said that it was off-key, but I'll remove it since the following sentence already describes the way he criticized the performance. Medxvo (talk) 01:55, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• The production and release info doesn't seem so related to each other to be merged in one section but I don't see a better alternative...
  • Yes, you get it.... But I saw that also Love Story (Taylor Swift song) merged them together so I think it should be fine.. Medxvo (talk) 01:55, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "Swift promises her detractors that she will achieve success" - "would" instead of "will"?
• "Some critics also [...] lauded its "irresistible" hook." - the last part is only sourced to one critic.
  • I tried to fix that a bit, how does it look now? Medxvo (talk) 01:55, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• I think we have the same issue here from the Christmas Tree Farm PR about the separated (Swift/genre) rankings in different subsections lol. I would just move the country rankings outside Accolades.
  • How does it look now? I combined the song and music video accolades in one section to avoid confusion. Bad Blood (Taylor Swift song) and Love Story (Taylor Swift song) both have this format and I think it's a great option. Medxvo (talk) 01:55, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Entertainment Weekly is linked two times.
• The "can seem jarring, at first, to hear" quote should be attributed.
  • Done, also made some adjustments to that paragraph. Medxvo (talk) 01:55, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Most sources are listed in WP:RSMUSIC or WP:RSP, no issues with the others except for uDiscoverMusic. It is operated by UMG, owner of Republic, so I would just remove that ref from the note.
• No issues at all with the broad, neutral, stable, or illustrated criteria.
• Earwig's Copyvio shows violation unlikely with the highest similarity at 24.8%, only highlighting quotes. Good!
• Spot-check with numbers as of this revision:
  • 1, 2 Y, 3 Y (why is 4 a here too?)
    • To confirm "the album's sixth track" part.... Medxvo (talk) 01:55, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • 9, 10, 11, 12 all Y
  • 14, 17 a, b, 26 a, b, 30, 44 a, b, 47 a, b, c, 48, 49 all Y
  • All sources for Swift and country rankings positions Y
  • 56 a just a nitpick but it technically says Swift won these categories, not "Mean"; you could use this source. b Y
  • Other sources for awards and nominations Y
  • 61 Y also supported by 62
  • 81 a Y, b Y also supported by 85
  • 97, 98, 99, 106, 107, 123, 128, 129, 130 all Y

@Medxvo: almost flawless article, not surprised! I will put this  On hold CatchMe (talk · contribs) 22:06, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot CatchMe for the great review! All should be done except for two or three points that I wanted to discuss further with you. I also left some explanations above. Medxvo (talk) 01:55, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Great work and alternative ideas. I'll just wait for two things above. CatchMe (talk · contribs) 06:19, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much, all should be done now!! Medxvo (talk) 10:32, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats on your new GA!! Passing now. CatchMe (talk · contribs) 19:17, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]