Talk:Caught Up (Usher song)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Caught Up (Usher song) article.
Article policies
Good article Caught Up (Usher song) has been listed as one of the Arts good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Good article GA This article has been rated as ga-Class on the assessment scale.
This article is part of WikiProject R&B and Soul Music, an ongoing effort to improve articles related to rhythm and blues, soul music, and their related cultures. The goal of the project is to bring this article, along with all others to featured status. If you have any questions, concerns or wish to participate you can visit the main project page here.
Good article GA This article has been rated as ga-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

[edit] Failed "good article" nomination

This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of March 14, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Not bad, but this article needs a solid copyediting. I suggest someone read it out loud, and some of the phrasing issues would pop out. Some of the worst offenders:
  • What does this mean? "They went to club to turn "music to vibe""
  • "Jon Caramanica Blender referred to the sound a "Southern marching band performing late-'80s R&B."
  • The Engish is the Music Video section is atrocious. Honestly.
2. Factually accurate?: excellent reffing
3. Broad in coverage?: Pass
4. Neutral point of view?: I question that there isn't a single negative (or even mixed) review. Don't necessarily go looking for one (sometimes reviews are glowing), but check some of these other famous reviewers, and consider including some of their comments: The New York Times, Rolling Stone, Vibe, and MetaCritic.
5. Article stability? Pass
6. Images?: Pass

The article is good in many respects, but is in desperate need of a copyedit.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it have it reassessed. Thank you for your work so far.— Esprit15d • talk • contribs 13:19, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Hehe. I go through this one hastily. Maybe I should have at least given one or two days of copyediting before passing to GA. --Efe (talk) 08:21, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
I believe failing this one was not the ultimate decision; it could be on hold. Comments are "addressable" in a matter of minutes of hour. Anyway, I've waited for someone to review this and thanks Esprit for such. I've addressed most of your concerns and I'm heading to GAN again. I hope you will review this for the second time. Thanks. --Efe (talk) 08:57, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 2nd GA nomination

I'm passing the article; I saw a lot of improvement. The music video section still needed grammatic attention, but I fixed it myself and passed the article.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 12:39, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for passing and for the ce. --Efe (talk) 00:55, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fabolous

Doesn't Fabolous sing in this song? Tcatron565 (talk) 00:09, 15 April 2008 (UTC)