Talk:Vamos a la playa (Righeira song)

Vamos a la playa (Righeira song) was nominated as a Music good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (January 15, 2023, reviewed version). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

There used to be a long text about the somewhat surprising meaning of the lyrics to this famous song, why did someone remove that text? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.169.39.14 (talk) 22:45, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Because the deletionist cancer is spreading. I quit collaborating ages ago because of this sort of nonsense.--179.180.103.228 (talk) 01:06, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Unsuccessful. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 07:21, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Vamos a la playa (Righeira song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sammi Brie (talk · contribs) 21:16, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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 (references): 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, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Welcome to GA, Tomaten05! I am concerned that the article is not sufficiently broad for GA status. Is there additional significant coverage to incorporate? Other than that, the article's existing materials need some copy tweaks. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 21:16, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Tomaten05 I see you've addressed the copy issues. Is there any more significant coverage that can be added? Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 07:25, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Tomaten05 Unfortunately, I'm still not convinced on the broadness/coverage question. While the page meets most of the other GA criteria, I think failure is more appropriate than passing the nomination. Please don't be discouraged; I hope you learned a lot. Next time you do a nomination, I encourage you to reply to comments from the reviewer so we don't have to go watching for every change just to see if someone is engaging with us. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 07:21, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copy changes

More copy would help the large blockquote, which is relevant and impossible to trim further, not dominate the page so much.

"Vamos a la playa" was released in the United Kingdom in 1983, and entered the UK Singles Chart at number 99
"Vamos a la playa" debuted at number 40 on the Ultratop chart on 13 August 1983, and reached a peak of number two.
"Vamos a la playa" debuted at number 15 on the Dutch Top 40, and reached a peak of two on 10 September 1983. These three extracts each feature a comma that should be removed because there's no second subject after the comma. User:Sammi Brie/Commas in sentences
"issued dated" typo, fix

Sourcing and spot checks

Earwig turns up a low percentage. This is because the large blockquote was translated from Italian.

4 (Vice interview): Appears to be a faithful translation from Italian. Y
6: Seems to check out in French (I see acides). Y
15: Tre milioni di copie vendute in tutto il mondo Y
18: Cannot verify, offline liner notes.
21: Charts website lists a peak of 11 for the song on the Austrian charts. Y
37: Cannot verify, offline liner notes.

I notice 29 of the 38 sources are tied to music charts or similar.

Other items

The two cover art items in the infoboxes have valid non-free use rationales. I do recommend adding alt text. This helps users who use screen readers and cannot actually see the image.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.