Talk:7/27

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 7/27 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

7/27 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.
Review: September 13, 2019.

Albums C‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

This article was nominated for deletion on 27 February 2016. The result of the discussion was keep.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Twofingered Typist, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on April 7, 2018.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors

Pop music C‑class Low‑importance

	Pop music portal 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
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wrong information

The writers and producers information for the Title "That's My Girl" is completely wrong and violating the rights of the real writers and producers. I kindly ask for an ASAP exchange to the real writers and producers:

Written by: Lukas Loules, Alexander Kronlund, Tinashe Kaschingwe

Producer: LULOU and Alexander Kronlund

source: http://genius.com/Fifth-harmony-thats-my-girl-lyrics — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.184.243.183 (talk) 17:46, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Writers and Producers information is wrong : Right information is:

Written by Lukas Loules , Alexander Kronlund , Tinashe kaschingwe Produced by LULOU

http://genius.com/Fifth-harmony-the-life-lyrics — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.184.243.183 (talk) 19:24, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 28 May 2016

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Under singles, it should say "All In My Head (Flex)" will impact rhythmic radio on May 31, 2016.^[1]. The source needs to be archived though.

References

^ http://www.allaccess.com/top40-rhythmic/future-releases

99.57.170.190 (talk) 03:56, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done with an updated source. OUR Wikipedia (not "mine")! Paine 11:07, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Producer

Jack Antonoff should be listed as the producer for "Dope" not Tommy Brown. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.48.22.109 (talk) 00:25, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deluxe VS Standard Cover

The deluxe cover should be the featured cover in the infobox, given its more recognizable recognition, per WP:NFCC. The same happened at MDNA (album), given that the deluxe edition is the more recognized conceptual artwork, in comparison to the standard, which was unveiled within days of its release. livelikemusic talk! 23:52, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Released dates is not a major problem. Take The Pinkprint for example, the deluxe artwork was released earlier than the standard artwork. But following the release of the album, the former was replaced by the latter on Wikipedia page. Back to 5H, the standard cover is used in Billboard charts and other record charts. This means that the standard cover receive more coverage than the deluxe one.--U990467 (talk) 08:43, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The deluxe cover version has a more recognizable color scheme. The colors of the standard version are not color blind-friendly, which represent a difficulty for those that may suffer from that condition. As a worldwide recognisable site for information, Wikipedia should always choose to represent things the best way for everyone to understand it. Meaning, the deluxe cover should be the one used in the article. Billboard is in no way a source for albums covers (it doesn't even operate in most countries). --Tvimagazine (talk) 14:59, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I support using the deluxe cover in the infobox versus the standard. The deluxe artwork is used more than the standard, is older, and more recognizable due to color scheme and popularity. ilovemusic ^{(Talk To Me!)} 21:50, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 10 January 2017

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Maskati16 (talk) 01:09, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Life was featured on the third season of the TV Show Younger.

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 01:19, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Massive WP:PEACOCK/Songs

Dear @LikeGaga:: A wall of text listing glowing reviews is not encyclopedic in nature, but promotional. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a review site. Hence I reverted (and will soon revert again) Phrases like "light reggae guitar plucks, "glowing synths" crashing with the "industrialized percussion." "Squeeze" is "a breezy, generic foot-stomper". "Put your arms around me, baby," the girls coo over starlight synths and a rousing kickbeat, "Only you know how to save me." "Gonna Get Better" features a "romantic acoustic guitar" with a similar vibe of "Write On Me". "Scare of Happy" is a "vibrant house-pop fizz". are nothing short of that and hence not acceptable. Kleuske (talk) 21:17, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh thank you! I really don't knew nothing about that! So I will write again but with a more "acceptable" standard. I can do that?

User:LikeGaga (talk) 21:40, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Of course you can. Kleuske (talk) 21:48, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

But ""old-school stomp and '80s-inspired synths that echo the very best of Janet Jackson" and more phrases like that are still not acceptable. Please try a more neutral tone. Thanks. Kleuske (talk) 22:39, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I gather english is not your first language, is it? The grammar and style still leave much to be desired and I threw out the rest of the WP:PEACOCKS for you. Kleuske (talk) 23:45, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Fifth Harmony - Write On Me.flac

File:Fifth Harmony - Write On Me.flac is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a non-free use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

-- Marchjuly (talk) 04:47, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:7/27/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 07:48, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I will use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:18, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Immediate Failures

It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria - Y 10:35, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
It contains copyright infringements - Y 10:35, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include{{cleanup}}, {{POV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{citation needed}}, {{clarify}}, or similar tags. (See also {{QF-tags}}). - Y 10:35, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
It is not stable due to edit warring on the page. -Y 10:35, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Links

Prose

Lede

7/27 is the second studio album by American girl group Fifth Harmony that was released by Syco Music and Epic Records on May 27, 2016. - could we get more genre than girl group? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:46, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean? MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 14:34, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as stated below, they are lots of genres. Even if it was "American pop girl group" etc, Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:40, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

could we link the band in the hatnote? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:46, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Try to avoid starting sentences with a number. I realise it's difficult with the name of the album being a number, but it's still frowned upon. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:46, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
equivalent album units - is this wikilinkable? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:46, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done

General prose

There's quite a few duplinks. Priscilla Renea, Simon Wilcox, Benny Blanco, Julia Michaels, Nolan Lambroza and AllMusic in Songs and lyrical content there's also a few in the reception section. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:09, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
reaching number 12 on US Billboard Hot 100 - link the chart. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:09, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See the source, it as the peak. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 14:56, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The following day, digital music platform iTunes updated the track list with two tracks under the explicit label, making this Fifth Harmony's first release to contain explicit lyrics. - needs a cite Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:09, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
some demos - "demos" is a jargon term. Either link or explain. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:09, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As of November 2015, the group had finished six tracks for the album but these were ultimately removed from it. - reword. As of November 2015, the group had finished six tracks but these were ultimately removed from the album. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:09, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
First paragraph on "title and artwork" could do with a few more cites. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:09, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Should probably mention it was the American version of the X-Factor. There's about 50 now. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:09, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Fifth Harmony performing on the 7/27 Tour in 2016 - image captions should be full sentences. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:09, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Missy Elliot is a funk-inspired song with 1980s synths that string together with clinking clapping bass.[30][1] - not strictly part of the GAN, but the ref order here is wrong. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:09, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
exclusive, original emoji - emoji should be linked Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:09, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Following Camila Cabello's departure from the group, Fifth Harmony announced a new Asian leg for the tour, which also visited several festivals and shows in America. - needs a cite. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:09, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"Singles" has two set of four references. Bit close to a WP:REFBOMB in my eyes. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:09, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
At Metacritic, which assigns a normalized rating out of 100 to reviews from mainstream critics, the album received an average score of 70, which indicates "generally favorable reviews", based on 7 reviews. - I'm not sure if this is true elsewhere (my experience is with video games), is that scores aren't mentioned in the prose, if they are in the review box. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:09, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look here Metacritic#Metascores. They aren't usualy mentioned one by one, this is just an agregate. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 13:52, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think you've misunderstood. But, looking at other music articles, this is how it's done, so it's fine. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:00, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bohlsen called 7/27 a "solid pop album that manages to stand out from the crowd, with catchy singles, and a sense of confidence that can’t be found anywhere else" - not sure this should be in the paragraph on poor reviews. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:09, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Billboard 200, earning 74,000 equivalent album units (49,000 in pure album sales) - this needs explanation. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:09, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Credits adapted from 7/27 [11] - not a sentence. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:09, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done

Notes & References

Image review

Is this file File:Fifth Harmony 7-27 Tour Brazil (2).jpg suitable for commons? Looks like a crop of an image on there. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:18, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As I didn't upload it, I have no idea. If you want I can remove it. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 15:02, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I took another look, it is in good faith, regardless, so it's fine. I'm not going to raise an objection. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:57, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cover is fine on public domain - Needs some extra infomation on the page however (why it's not replacable, etc.) Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:18, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done

GA Review

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Comments

Automated note - If you fancy returning the favour, I have outstanding GA nominations that require reviewing at WP:GAN. I'd be very grateful if you were to complete one of these, however it's definately not manditory. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:17, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll take a look at this one - surprised it took so long to get seen too - article looks in great shape from a quick viewing, give me a couple days to check the prose. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:49, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - Only a few issues to clear up UrbanJE Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:29, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note from WT:ALBUMS request for input. I think the lead needs some tightening up in the prose. It lists like 7 genre in one sentence, and mentions tropic house two sentences in a row. It’s not that I particularly contest any specific genre, I’m just saying it reads a bit like “example bloat”, especially when it’s just listing them off without saying much else. Sergecross73 msg me 12:37, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- In taking a look, I'd agree with that. Could easily just mention what ones are important. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:49, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Lee Vilenski: I'm not sure if UrbanJE is on wiki anymore. Do you mind if I adress the issues you raised? MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 13:28, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MarioSoulTruthFan Absolutely. Go ahead 13:38, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Lee Vilenski: I have almost adressed the issue you raised, nevetheless the commercial performance section is quite poor. I tried to improved it a bit, but it needs some serious work. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 21:59, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The rest of the article looks pretty good. I don't think the section is all that bad. It probably just needs a slight bit of expansion, and a little tightening. What would you like me to do with the review? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:23, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

From my point of view, you could take a look if I addressed the changes you wanted and then give me some time to expand the commercial performance section. Nevertheless, it is up to you as the reviewer. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 13:53, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Of course. I'll take a look. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:55, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Having a read through (I did a little cleanup), I don't think the section will fail a GA. It probably needs a bit of work (especially at FA), but there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the section, so I'll go ahead and pass this GA. Thanks for stepping in to rescue it. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:15, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttp://www.allaccess.com/top40-rhythmic/future-releases

[1]