# Talk:L.A. Boyz (song)

This review is transcluded from Talk:L.A. Boyz (song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Shoot for the Stars (talk · contribs) 01:13, 31 March 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: Watagwaan (talk · contribs) 18:04, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
Hello! I'm not the most experienced editor but I'll take a look! Victorious was one of my childhood shows.

sung by Justice and Grande seems a bit redundant considering the opening sentence. Perhaps remove this text and combine it with the next sentence. It would read: The song first appeared in a music video on Nickelodeon on October 18, 2012, and was released on the show's second and final extended play (EP)... So on so forth.
 Done
The "Background and release" section really just talks about the music video and the release date of the song, instead of any actual background information pertaining to it such as the inspiration or writing process. Maybe make a section under "Reception" titled "Music video" and drop a majority of it there, and add the release date to "Reception"? You could even retitle it "Release and reception" thereafter.
I have removed the "background" part and just named it "Release history"
This is a nitpicky suggestion, but "Composition" could work as opposed to "Music and writing", or even "Music and lyrics".
 Done
Perhaps start the "Reception" section with L.A. Boyz" received positive reviews from music critics. or something similar.
 Done
said it is "ridiculously catchy song" is grammatically incorrect. Did you mean to put said it is a "ridiculously catchy song"?
I have fixed it.
You could shorten "Credits and personnel" to just "Personnel" as the terms mean roughly the same thing.
 Done
I hope this helps in some way, shape, or form! Have a lovely day/night!

Hey Watagwaan, I appreciate the review! I have addressed your comments above. Shoot for the Stars (talk) 02:14, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
Of course! Good luck, I hope it becomes a Good Article! Watagwaan (talk) 02:33, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
Watagwaan: Aren't you reviewing the article? It notified me that you are the reviewer? Shoot for the Stars (talk) 02:51, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
I did review the article, it was great! I'm sorry, I'm new to reviewing articles and nominated one of my own as well. I assumed you needed multiple reviewers and an administrator of some sort to promote the article. Watagwaan (talk) 03:19, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
Watagwaan Since you are the reviewer, if you think the article is good enough pass you can do it yourself. You usually don't need an admin or other editors. Shoot for the Stars (talk) 03:31, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
Oh, ok! Thank you for clarifying.
Well-written: Yes!
Verifiable with no original research: Yes! All your information seems to be accredited to noteworthy or credible sources.
Broad in its coverage: Yes! It is often tough to write much about television songs, but you did well!
Neutral: Yes! All statements made are well supported without bias.
Stable: Yes! No edit wars from what I can see.
Illustrated, if possible: It is not currently, but considering this never had an official single release, I doubt there's cover art. A sample of the song couldn't work, perhaps in "Composition".
Good work! Watagwaan (talk) 05:22, 10 April 2025 (UTC)