# Talk:Liubi, Liubi, I Love You

Does this article really need to exist? I don't know much about it, so I would appreciate some input, but it seems to be lacking in notability. Ketsuekigata 15:16, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

@Ketsuekigata: In case you're still active on Wikipedia, I have expanded the article after 11 years (!) and even nominated it for GA. I hope it's more notable now lol.  Best regards; Cartoon network freak (talk) 22:03, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Liubi, Liubi, I Love You/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Aoba47 (talk · contribs) 20:41, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Lead and infobox
I do not see why the reference is necessary for the lead, as that information should be included and sourced in the body of the article.
There is so little information on the music video that you can't make a proper section out of it. I've seen this type of referencing in some other articles, but I can change it if you really want me to.
I agree that a separate section should not be added, but everything in the lead has to be in the body of the article. I would add the information about the music video in the "Background and release" section. Aoba47 (talk) 01:09, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
I do not think that the languages need wikilinks.
For this part (a CD single), I would extend the wikilink to the full phrase "CD single". I would also change the wikilink to the "CD single" article.
For this sentence (Written by Taşcău, Creţu and Ghedi, and solely produced by Taşcău, its lyrics deal with the theme of love and European clichés.), something about the beginning reads awkwardly to me. I would split the information into two sentences, and have the first one read something like (Taşcău produced the song and co-wrote it with Creţu and Ghedi.).
For this part (was promoted by endeavours), "endeavours" is a strange word choice in this context. I think that "performances" would work better.
Background and release
For this part (It emerged from the idea of Răileanu, while originally intended for Ștefănescu), I would replaced "while" and "and was", as I think that is the better transition.
Again, I do not believe the language wikilinks are necessary.
For this part (and discuss on European clichés), it should be just "discuss" not "discuss on".
At Eurovision
The image caption should not have punctuation as it is not a full sentence. The image should also have ALT text.
For this part (As automatically qualified for the final due to), I would revise it to "Automatically qualifying for the final due to...).
Commercial performance
The chart placement (as shown in the "Charts" section/table) should also be mentioned in the prose (ideally with a note on why the exact number placement is not available).
I don't quite know what you mean by "prose", but if that's the article's body, there's not enough information to make up a "commercial performance" section. I've added the note.
By "prose", I mean the information about the chart performance needs to be stated in the text of the article as well as the chart. I agree that a separate section should not be added, but it could easily be placed in the "Background and release" section. Aoba47 (talk) 01:09, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
Credits and personnel
I would add a section for this.
Release history
Remove "N/A" and just let the year stand by itself.
Final comments
Great work as usual. Once my comments are addressed, I will pass this. Aoba47 (talk) 20:41, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
@Aoba47: Thanks for reviewing! Comments are addressed, apart from where commented on. Greets; Cartoon network freak (talk) 22:43, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
I have added responses to your comments. Once they are addressed, I will pass this. Aoba47 (talk) 01:09, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
@Aoba47:  Done Cartoon network freak (talk) 07:33, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
Verdict
I will pass this now. Aoba47 (talk) 17:31, 27 January 2019 (UTC)