Talk:The Black Dog (song)

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

Nominator: Gained (talk · contribs) 08:25, 1 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Reviewer: Medxvo (talk · contribs) 09:05, 4 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

• Can we include that Republic Records released the song in prose since it's currently only written in infobox?
  •   Done
• "Josh Kurp of Uproxx said that there was influences from Phoebe Bridgers due to how the song intensifies towards the end" → "Josh Kurp of Uproxx thought that there were influences from works by the American singer Phoebe Bridgers on how the song intensifies towards the end"
  •   Done, but I changed "thought" to "believe" because I think it reads better..
• "as if Swift's album Folklore (2020) included pop rock" → "as if Swift's album Folklore (2020) included punk rock production elements"; the source says punk rock
  •   Partly done; I'm not sure where "production elements" came from so I did not include it..
    •   Comment: Sorry for not clarifying this earlier, I just didn't like how "album included a genre" sounds and how the sentence ends with a genre. My suggestion is to paraphrase this however you like but feel free to disagree/discuss this with me. Medxvo (talk) 09:29, 14 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

  I have moved it into the "Critical reception" section because I think it better fits there. Gained (talk) 07:48, 15 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

• "Critics and fans interpreted the song's title as a term for depression or a pub in Vauxhall, London, which gained attraction following its release" → "Critics and Swift's fans interpreted the title of "The Black Dog" as a term for depression or a pub in Vauxhall, London, which gained public attraction following the song's release"
  •   Done
• "Harry Potter" → "the novel series Harry Potter"
  •   Done
• "The first demo recording of the song was also released on May 28" → Doesn't the source say May 16?
  •   Done
• "She sang it two more times in mashups with her song "Exile" (2020) at the tour's Warsaw stop on August 3, and with her song "Haunted" (2010) at the tour's New Orleans stop on October 25" → Any way to paraphrase this? It reads as she performed it two times with "Exile" alone
  •   Done; does the sentence read any better? Gained (talk) 07:29, 14 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
    •   Approved Much better! Medxvo (talk) 09:29, 14 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
• "made Swift the artist with the most entries in a single week with 29" → Did the song's position "made" Swift the artist ... or did it just help her? I mean, was it the lowest charting song from the album, the lowest charting song on the chart, etc... or none of these? I think otherwise it's better to use "helped" not "made"
  •   Done; I agree with this

• "When it was released, "The Black Dog" garnered a positive reception from critics in reviews of the double album and in lists of Swift's and Antonoff's repertoires" → Did this change later? My suggestion is, "Following its release, "The Black Dog" garnered a positive reception from critics in reviews of the double album and in lists of Swift's and Antonoff's repertoires".
  •   Done, and nope, the sentence did not change one bit since when I wrote it.
• "The production received positive reviews. Sirosky considered the song ..." → Can we combine the two sentences? As, "The production received positive reviews, with Sirosky considering the song ..."
  •   Not done; I'm not sure.. it seems like giving the review undue weight like it's more important than the other reviews..
    •   Approved Medxvo (talk) 09:29, 14 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
• "Nate Jones of Vulture opined that it had ..." → "Nate Jones of Vulture opined that "The Black Dog" had ..."
• "Neil McCormick from The Telegraph wrote that it contained ..." → "Neil McCormick from The Telegraph wrote that "The Black Dog" contained ..."
• "Nashville-honed" → Nashville can be linked
• "successful in "[subverting] expectations" on the song in that ..." → "successful in "[subverting] expectations" on "The Black Dog", in that ..."
  •   Done the four points above
• "Callie Ahlgrim of Business Insider said that Swift's storytelling was wonderfully in her style and described it as "modern yet classic, aching yet righteous, existential yet specific", and she thought it presented her ability to transform the locations of depicted heartbreak "into sacred ground" → "Callie Ahlgrim of Business Insider said that Swift's storytelling was wonderfully in her style, describing it as "modern yet classic, aching yet righteous, existential yet specific". She thought it presented her ability to transform the locations of depicted heartbreak "into sacred ground"
  •   Done, but I also added "also" in the second sentence; without it seems like it's missing something
• "once someone else breaks that trust?" → full stop before the citation
  •   Not done per MOS:"
    •   Approved Medxvo (talk) 09:29, 14 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
• "Keefe wrote that the track showcased one of her most effective tropes ..." → "Keefe wrote that "The Black Dog" showcased one of Swift's most effective tropes ..."
  •   Partly done. Having "Swift" in four consecutive sentences would be repetitive, and I think readers would still get that it's referring to her.
    •   Comment: The Keefe sentence specifically is full of he/she/her/its and I don't really think it's a good idea to put all of the pronouns into this one specific complicated sentence. Perhaps "where Swift expresses genuine emotion" can be changed to "where she expresses genuine emotion" so you can add "Swift" here? Medxvo (talk) 09:29, 14 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Good point, I have changed it into your suggestion. I also paraphrased Keefe's sentence to have less pronouns. Gained (talk) 08:02, 15 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

• "The chorus was also praised. Jones said that it had a "big shout-y hook", which he believed was generally absent on the double album and was going to be screamed at shows by millenials. Sirosky viewed its melody to be in "classic Swift earworm style", while McCormick opined it had a "punchy hook". For The Hollywood Reporter's Ryan Fish, the chorus was an "epic, screeching" one that would relish fans live" → "The chorus was also praised, with Sirosky viewing its melody to be in "classic Swift earworm style". Jones said that the chorus had a "big shout-y hook", which he believed was generally absent on the double album and was going to be screamed at shows by millenials. McCormick described the hook as "punchy". For The Hollywood Reporter's Ryan Fish, the chorus was an "epic, screeching" one that would relish Swift's fans live"; My main suggestion is to keep consistent and have a good flow, you can paraphrase this however you like
  •   Partly done – I believe that the sequence of these sentences is great as it is, but I did change McCormick's sentence into your liking.
    •   Comment: My main comment is that "Sirosky viewed its melody" reads to me that "its" refers to the hook not the chorus itself, because the sentence before this was mainly about the hook (even if the part is generally about the chorus). I even had to check the source to see what "its" refers to. Can you take a look at my suggestion again and paraphrase this part however you like? I don't really like how it currently sounds... Medxvo (talk) 09:29, 14 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

  I have parpharsed the part. Does it read better? Gained (talk) 08:21, 15 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

• "For Entertainment Weekly's Allaire Nuss, it was one of the double album's tracks ..." → "For Entertainment Weekly's Allaire Nuss, "The Black Dog" was one of the double album's tracks ..."
•   Done

• Is there a source for the personnel section?
• Most of the references need to be archived
• Ref 5, 17, 24, and 44; limited access
• I suggest directly using this source instead of Ref 33, since WP:RSPSS suggests not confusing the US ABC News with other publications
  •   Done all above
• I also suggest using Capital instead of Capital FM in references
  •   Not done; I added the "FM" in references so readers could recognize it if they are familiar with the radio station. It's also how they brand themselves on their social media accounts.
    •   Comment: Capital removed FM from their on-air output many years ago before removing it from the logo in 2022, here. The Wikipedia article (and their Instagram account) also don't have FM. I'm not sure if adding FM is an improvement. Medxvo (talk) 09:29, 14 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

  I have now removed it since that the point you made was good and that there was a number of radio stations that were of the same name. Gained (talk) 08:26, 15 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

• Is there a reason for using The Telegraph instead of The Daily Telegraph in prose and references?
  • They are also known as that, but for the consistency with "Capital FM", I've now added the "Daily" within the title. Gained (talk) 08:30, 14 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

This took a bit longer than expected, but I tried to help as much as I can to make the article ready for FAC and I wish you good luck already if you're planning on that :) @Gained: I hope my suggestions are helpful and feel free to discuss anything with me anytime. I will put this   On hold for now. Medxvo (talk) 09:05, 4 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, @Medxvo! Thanks for choosing this to review and I really appreciate that you reviewed this in a way that it could be ready for FAC :D. I'll address this in a few days. Gained (talk) 10:32, 4 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello, thanks for the quick reply! No rush at all, take as much time as you need :) Medxvo (talk) 10:55, 4 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, @Medxvo! I've now addressed your concerns and have left comments on them above. Gained (talk) 08:30, 14 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Gained: Hello, hope you're doing well! I've also left some comments above, and would like so add some comments here, if you don't mind that....

• Is there a reason for using ISSN for some sources but not the others? You are free to remove them if you like

The ISSNs were added by the citation creator, and I generally ignored them thinking they were not that important; I think their inclusion is find as it is.

• Some sources are not archived, I don't really mind that but this is just a reminder

  Done

• I can pass the Uproxx source being used for the personnel, but also a reminder that the physical editions will be released in two weeks so consider adding the liner notes whenever you can :)

Of course!

• I will also pass Bustle because it's mainly used as a review, but I'm not sure if Bustle passes a FAC

From my observation, it will depend on the opinions of reviewers if they believe it is warranted or not.

• I think the Business Insider sources have a limited access so my apologies for not saying this earlier

  Done; it's okayy

That's all. Glad to pass once everything is addressed or discussed and have a good day! :) Medxvo (talk) 09:29, 14 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

I believe everything's addressed! :D Gained (talk) 09:40, 15 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Medxvo; forgot to ping. Gained (talk) 09:42, 15 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Gained: First of all, my apologies if I was super, super nitpick-y, I just wanted to help after noticing that you're aiming for a FAC soon. Hope you didn't mind that and hope my comments were helpful. For the ISSN thing, I've recently noticed that the source reviewer commented on it at this FAC, so just thought I should point it out.

Anyways, I'm happy to say that I will ✓ Pass the article now! Congratulations and feel free to ping me whenever you nominate the article for a FAC, I would be glad to share my thoughts there :)

BTW, I currently have a peer review request open for How You Get the Girl hoping to nominate it for a FAC soon, your thoughts and comments are very much appreciated if you have time! Medxvo (talk) 10:55, 15 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Medxvo: Thanks for the review! I really appreciate that you tried to help prepare this article for FAC, and I believe you were generally successful at doing that. I'll try to review "How You Get the Girl" and comment on it this weekend. :) Gained (talk) 11:10, 15 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks so much! Have a great week :) Medxvo (talk) 11:22, 15 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

  This article is currently the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 October 2024 and 19 December 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rewilliams02 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Rewilliams02 (talk) 05:38, 16 November 2024 (UTC)Reply