Jump to content

Talk:Dilaw (song)/GA2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Nominator: Royiswariii (talk · contribs) 15:31, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 11:20, 16 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 start the second review of this article today! --K. Peake 11:20, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox and lead

[edit]

'Done. ROY is WAR Talk! 06:51, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Apart from indie, which is merely sourced as indie music, none of these genres are mentioned in the body

Done by revising. ROY is WAR Talk! 06:51, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Shouldn't you mention the songwriters as well as producers and make this a second sentence entirely?

Done. ROY is WAR Talk! 06:51, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • The genres need to be sourced in the body

I think it should not add it per WP:CITELEAD. ROY is WAR Talk! 06:51, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Start the second para from commercial performance onwards
Done by RFNirmala. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:17, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The single later debuted" → "It later debuted"
Done by RFNirmala. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:17, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • You should summarize the music video in the lead too

Done. ROY is WAR Talk! 06:51, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Background

[edit]
  • The release of the EP is not sourced
It is already cited [1]. ROY is WAR Talk! 06:59, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Done by RFNirmala. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:17, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The EP being a success is not sourced
It is already cited [1]. ROY is WAR Talk! 06:59, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Try re-wording to something different than "continued his momentum", as this does not read neutrally
Done. ROY is WAR Talk! 06:59, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Composition and lyrics

[edit]
  • Add info about the comp or lyrics to the audio sample's text
  • "twelve seconds long, the song" → "twelve seconds long; the song"
  • Pipe indie to Independent music
  • Any information to add to prose about the composition itself or chorus?
  • Wikilink Billboard Philippines
Done by RFNirmala. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:17, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "listeners of that single" → "listeners of "Dilaw""
Done by RFNirmala. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:17, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Promotion and release

[edit]
Done by RFNirmala. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:17, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The May 11 date of announcement is not sourced
  • "On August 2," → "On August 2, 2024,"
Done by RFNirmala. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:17, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The second para should be merged with the first as they are both about performances; only the album release should be a separate para as that does not concern promotion
Done. ROY is WAR Talk! 07:02, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Music video

[edit]
  • "the music video" → the song's music video" with the wikilink
Done by RFNirmala. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:17, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove "its premiere" from the end of the YouTube Philippines sentence because the release is already mentioned earlier in the sentence
Done by RFNirmala. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:17, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge the third and second paras since they both discuss forms of reception
Done by RFNirmala. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:17, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Critical reception

[edit]
  • Remove wikilink on Billboard Philippines
Done by RFNirmala. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:17, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • [17] does not source anything for the first sentence
Done. ROY is WAR Talk! 07:07, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • You should make the accolades a sub-section here

Commercial performance

[edit]
  • "three weeks[19] before peaking" → "three weeks,[19] before peaking"

Done. ROY is WAR Talk! 07:10, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Remove wikilink on Spotify
Done by RFNirmala. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:17, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • [22][1] should be in numerical order
  • Merge the 100 million views stat with the above para since these are all focused on Spotify
Done by RFNirmala. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:17, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "as the Top 4 music video" → "as the top four music video" per MOS:NUM and move the YouTube ranking to the end of the music video sentence instead because there are already stats about the video touched on there
Done by RFNirmala. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:17, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Top 2 Song in" → "top two song in" per MOS:NUM; merge the top two and tenth most searched with the Spotify paragraph too, as these are both focused on online platforms
Done by RFNirmala. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:17, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove quotation marks from The Official Philippines Chart per the sources not using them
Done by RFNirmala. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:17, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adaptations

[edit]
  • "titled "Hilaw" (lit. 'Raw' in Tagalog) was" → "titled "Hilaw" (lit. 'Raw' in Tagalog), was"
Done by RFNirmala. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:17, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove pipe on Wish 107.5
Done by RFNirmala. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:17, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Accolades

[edit]
  • What purpose does [35] serve when all those awards are mentioned by [34]?

Charts

[edit]

Weekly charts

[edit]
  • Good

Year-end charts

[edit]
  • Remove wikilinks on Philippines Hot 100 and Top Philippines Songs
Done. ROY is WAR Talk! 07:11, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Credits and personnel

[edit]
  • Vocal → Vocals
  • Use {{spaced ndash}} so there is the right space between credits and personnel

Release history

[edit]
  • Format → Format(s)
  • Pipe streaming to Streaming media
  • Center the ref column instead

Notes

[edit]
  • Good

References

[edit]
It is just a quoting to the song. It is not a big deal based on my previous nomination on other songs that are now successful as GA. ROY is WAR Talk! 07:16, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fix MOS:QWQ issues with refs 1, 6, 19
Done. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:55, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Done, piping is not needed here since ABS-CBN News is a redirect to ABS-CBN News and Current Affairs. Additionally, ABS-CBN News should be cited as the publication instead of the publisher. ABS-CBN News is the name of the newspaper (publication), while ABS-CBN News and Current Affairs is the company responsible for that newspaper (publisher). It has been a norm across Philippine-related articles to cite these newspaper names as the publication in citation templates. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:55, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Done. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:55, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cite Wish 107.5 as publisher instead on ref 10
Done. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:55, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cite GMA News Online as publisher instead on refs 11 and 35
Done. GMA News Online should be also cited as the publication for the same reason I stated above for ABS-CBN News. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:55, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cite ABS-CBN as publisher instead and fix MOS:CAPS issues on ref 13
Done the name to ABS-CBN News. And same as the above, this should be cited as the publication not the publisher AstrooKai (Talk) 02:55, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cite Myx Global as publisher instead on ref 15
Done, Myx Global is the name of the magazine, not the publisher, same as the newspaper names. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:55, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • GMA NEWS ONLINE → GMA News Online and cite as publisher instead on ref 23
Done, set as publication for the same reason stated about ABS-CBN News. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:55, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pipe ABS-CBN News to ABS-CBN News and Current Affairs and fix MOS:QWQ issues with refs 24 and 29. Also, remove One News PH and why do you only capitalize news in some sources not others?
Done. Piping not needed, ABS-CBN is a redirect to the same article. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:55, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cite Rappler as publisher instead on ref 26
Ref#26 is not a Rappler source. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:55, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cite GMA News as publisher instead on refs 27, 28 and 34
Done, set as publication for the same reason stated about ABS-CBN News. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:55, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Done. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:55, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Done. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:55, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove International Federation of the Phonographic Industry from ref 39
Done. AstrooKai (Talk) 02:55, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Some of these were already accomplished by RFNirmala, but I corrected some of their fixes as they do not completely match up the instructions listed here. Additionally, I converted the citation templates of all references to the subject-specific templates for those sources (e.g. {{Cite magazine}} were instead used for magazine citations like Billboard Philippines while {{Cite news}} for news citations). AstrooKai (Talk) 02:55, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]
  • Good

Final comments and verdict

[edit]

Drive-by Comment

[edit]

Thank you for your review Kyle Peake, I will wait to complete your full review. ROY is WAR Talk! 03:59, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Royiswariii That is a great idea since things can change later on in reviews, this is now complete best of luck to you! --K. Peake 09:14, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, @Kyle Peake! It looks done now. ROY is WAR Talk! 14:35, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There's still much to do. Most of the accomplished ones were just formatting and styles. AstrooKai (Talk) 21:38, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Royiswariii After the comments back on 20th March, I have still not heard anything are you going to make more progress on this article? --K. Peake 14:20, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I will try to accomplish your recommendations today. ROY is WAR Talk! 08:10, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Royiswariii It has been three days later and still no comments on this, can you give a timeframe please or I may have to fail? --K. Peake 19:42, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Royiswariii Thanks for delving more into this one, although there are still points that remain unfixed. You need to add more info to the audio sample, try to add prose about the chorus if it can be sourced, the May 11 date of announcement is not sourced, make accolades a sub-section, why is ref 35 kept in accolades anyway, change format to format(s), center refs in release history and cite Rappler as publisher on any refs where it is used. --K. Peake 07:18, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kyle Peake, the May 11 date of the announcement, there is no news sources or Billboard Philippines covered that, However, Tarsier Records posted on their official Facebook page on the announcement of Dilaw. Take a look here. ROY is WAR Talk! 07:46, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Facebook posts from record labels are allowed as sources, so please add this accordingly. K. Peake 08:06, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Kyle Peake Done.
why is ref 35 kept in accolades anyway
make accolades a sub-section
  • can you explain what do you mean sub-section?
center refs in release history and cite Rappler as publisher on any refs where it is used
Done. ROY is WAR Talk! 07:55, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I just passed this by GA again to see its progress and the accolades part got me wondered. What do you mean by making it a sub-section? AstrooKai (Talk) 12:16, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Royiswariii: and AstrooKai, the accolades need to be a sub-section of critical reception and also the audio sample still needs more info about the music/lyrics. --K. Peake 10:59, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't seen this kind of practice on other GA-rated song articles, even on FA ones. Bad Blood (Taylor Swift song) and Gento (song), both of which are FA-rated articles, have their accolades separated as a stand-alone section. This has been the norm for other song articles too as far as I know.
While both "accolades" and "critical reception" reflect praise and recognition, accolades specifically refer to awards, honors, or formal commendations. In contrast, critical reception covers the broader analysis of the song by critics and audiences over time. AstrooKai (Talk) 11:52, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
AstrooKai There is a key difference between these articles and this one, being that they have expansive critical reception sections which this article does not so critical reception being a few sentences and accolades on its own here is not right. --K. Peake 07:21, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What about placing the contents of both Critical reception and Commercial performance under a new section called Reception? Similar to Cherry on Top (Bini song) § Reception. Both of them are still a reception, anyway. AstrooKai (Talk) 08:42, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I would be fine if you simply implemented this, please. K. Peake 16:47, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Done. See revision 1285599406. AstrooKai (Talk) 16:57, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dilaw_(song)/GA2&oldid=1285706430"