# Talk:Keith (song)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Keith (song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 08:28, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

This shouldn't take too long --K. Peake 08:28, 6 December 2022 (UTC)


### Infobox and lead
Shouldn't you write self-published instead of independent in the infobox since the latter may lead to readers thinking it is the label name?
Since there is an article titled independent record label page I believe that independent is the right word to use. Sebbirrrr (talk) 21:25, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
*Directly after writing/production, mention the recording in the same sentence

"it was independently released on" → "It was independently released as a single on" starting a new sentence here
"consider it a tribute song to him." → "to consider it as a tribute song to him."
""Keith" peaked at" → "The song peaked at"
"Song" is already mentioned twice in the previous sentence though. Sebbirrrr (talk) 21:25, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
*New Zealand Hot Singles chart → New Zealand Hot Singles Chart, with the wikilink per MOS:LINK2SECT

"Bell sang the track on" → "Bell sang it on"
"Bell was lauded by" → "Bell was applauded by" per the body
"She also performed "Keith" in" → "She also performed the song in"
The next sentence begins with "The song" and I believe that would also be repetitive. Sebbirrrr (talk) 21:25, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
Add a part about the synopsis
For the live video or for the music video? Sebbirrrr (talk) 21:25, 7 December 2022 (UTC)


### Background and release
*"when she brought the song to" → "when she brought the idea to"

"songs take you back."" → "songs take you back"." per MOS:QUOTE
Mention that the release was as a single


### Composition
*""Keith" is a country song" → "Musically, "Keith" is a country song"

"and that she had it on her phone for year before deciding to" → "and was on her phone for year before she decided to"
Remove speech marks around pays tribute since that is not a direct quote from both sources
"into our past."" → "into our past"." per MOS:QUOTE


### Reception and promotion
"Triple M stated that" → "The staff of Triple M stated that"
"The staff" is not mentioned in the composition section either though. Sebbirrrr (talk) 21:25, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
Why are you using re-entered despite no previous position having been mentioned?
In the source the ribbon on the bottom right of "Keith" says "RE-ENTRY". Should I still look for its original position? Sebbirrrr (talk) 21:25, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
*"calling it "touchy"" → "calling it "touching"" per the source

"catchy it was."" → "catchy it was"." per MOS:QUOTE
"An official music video was" → "An official music video for the song was" with the wikilink
Used "the single" instead as song is mentioned in the previous sentence already. Sebbirrrr (talk) 21:25, 7 December 2022 (UTC)


### Track listing
Good


### Charts
Good


### Release history
Good


### References
Copyvio score looks strong at 15.3%!!!
What exactly makes Who a reliable source on ref 13?
According to its article, it is the sister paper of People Magazine which is greenlit at WP:RSP. The only bit Who sources is the guitar one but I'm not opposed to removing it if you think it isn't reliable enough! Sebbirrrr (talk) 21:25, 7 December 2022 (UTC)


### Final comments and verdict
 On hold until all of the issues are fixed! --K. Peake 21:21, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
@Kyle Peake: Thanks a lot for reviewing! Let me know if I missed something. Cheers, Sebbirrrr (talk) 21:25, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
Sebbirrrr Either use the song's title only once in the lead or split into two paras and use it once in each, add mv synopsis and you need to write the staff of since that's reception. --K. Peake 10:33, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
@Kyle Peake: Done. Let me know how it looks now. Sebbirrrr (talk) 20:39, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
 Pass now, only had to do some quick copy editing! --K. Peake 21:56, 8 December 2022 (UTC)