# Talk:Golden Years (David Bowie song)

According to our article the king died in 1977, so he couldnt have died too soon? Stbalbach 05:22, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Bowie wrote the song but didn't release it until after King's death. Rentastrawberry 16:14, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
I'm wrong again. Bowie released, but he didn't dedicate it to Elvis before his death. Rentastrawberry 16:20, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)

Image:Bowie GoldenYears.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 18:19, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Golden Years (song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 09:30, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

You have a lot of pending GANs currently, therefore I will take this on! --K. Peake 09:30, 11 November 2021 (UTC)


### Infobox and lead
List the recording date as 21-30 September 1975 in the infobox, per the body
Replace hlist with bullet points per Template:Infobox song
Both done
"of his tenth studio album" → "from his tenth studio album," and while the fact it is from the album should be kept here, shouldn't the lead single part be its own sentence after the production and contributions/vocals one?
IMO it works better here
"Bowie claimed the song was" → "David said the song was" per MOS:SAMESURNAME and to avoid using "claimed" twice in this sentence; it is less appropriate when the person making the claim is the performer
I don't think Elvis Presley should be introduced here when he is in the body and most know of him anyway
Both done
Should she be referred to as Angie or Angela?
Former
"in September 1975." → "during September 1975."
"It was co-produced by Bowie" → "The song was co-produced by David Bowie" per his wife being the most recent mentioned
"featured contributions from" → "features contributions from" and are you sure the identities of the musicians should be here when they are already in the body? Potentially as a fix, you could write "on bass", "on drums", etc here.
"of the album's production." → "of Station to Station's production." since "the album" is used too many times by this point
"Bowie's previous album" → "Bowie's previous album,"
The years of the songs are not notable for the lead, also the term "single" is useless after the Diamonds' when the apostrophe shows the song is theirs
Pipe multi-tracked to Multitrack recording
Above seven done
"of "Golden Years" included" → "of the song included"
But three different songs are mentioned before this, so saying "the song" in this instance could mean any of those. – zmbro (talk) 14:20, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
You used "the song" only to refer to "Golden Years" though and influences have been previously mentioned, therefore it won't be confusing when this term is used here. --K. Peake 10:54, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
Fixed. – zmbro (talk) 18:09, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
"and being sealed off from" → "and being isolated from" to be less repetitive with the body
"thAat he will always protect her" → "that she will always be protected by him" per above
Remove American television show introduction to Soul Train
Add a sentence after the upon release one noting the song later charting in Ireland, the Netherlands and Sweden
The pipe to Mini Tour should only be on the first word because otherwise it sounds like a collection of tours
Above five done
There aren't enough reviews for a critical consensus and shouldn't this be at the start of the section anyway?
Will come back – zmbro (talk) 14:20, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
Kyle Peake How's that look? – zmbro (talk) 20:13, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
Quite good, reworded it though to be a bit smoother. --K. Peake 11:20, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
"by numerous artists, and appeared in" → "by numerous artists and made appearances in"
Done


### Writing and recording
This would be better-titled background and recording, as a lot of the info is background and that is supposed to begin an article
Add release year of the film in brackets
"Bowie's first wife Angie Bowie later claimed David" → "David's first wife Angie Bowie later claimed he" per MOS:SAMESURNAME; use the forename on the first instance in the sentence
Surround 'The Prettiest Star' with single quotation marks per MOS:QWQ
Rather than topping the charts, shouldn't you write the Billboard Hot 100?
"Bowie's 1975 single" → "David Bowie's 1975 single"
"in September,[9] he → "in September 1975,[9] Bowie"
Above done
"was recruited to play bass." → "was recruited for his instrument."
I don't like that but I agree it's super derivative as is. Would matching the lead be better (i.e. 'on guitar', 'on bass', etc.)? – zmbro (talk) 14:20, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
Keep merely as "was recruited" since you are doing practically the same for the guitarists earlier in this sentence. --K. Peake 10:54, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
Done. – zmbro (talk) 18:09, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
If the equipment is still present now, change "it featured" to "it features"
I have no idea if it still does. The source uses "featured" so that's what I used. – zmbro (talk) 14:20, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
"the majority of the album," → "the majority of Station to Station,"
Done


### Composition
Retitle to Composition and lyrics
Change the title of the audio sample to the song's name since you can mention the chorus on the text
"This sample showcases the song's elements of funk" → "An audio sample, showcasing the song's elements of funk on the chorus" with the wikilink and pipe
Wikilink Young Americans on the audio sample text
Ditto for krautrock, removing capitalisation
Remove wikilink on Young Americans in prose here
"further utlises elements" → "also utilises elements"
Use a semi-colon instead after doo-wop
Pipe multi-tracked to Multitrack recording
Above done
""Funky Broadway", which Slick" → ""Funky Broadway" that Earl Slick" to avoid overusage of which and per this not being his real name
"in its main" → "in the main"
Pipe key to Key (music)
"of Aladdin Sane (1973)." → "of Bowie's Aladdin Sane (1973)."
Wikilink hi-hat
"These combined elements" → "According to him, these combined elements"
"in the verses with a" → "in the verses, with a" for correct separation
"throughout the track while the left" → "throughout while the left"
Pipe structure to Song structure
"a chord progression of" → "a chord progression from"
"to an E minor" → "then an E minor"
Above done
Pipe Moog synthesiser to Moog synthesizer
It already is
Pipe cut time to Alla breve
"that the lyric carries" → "that the lyrics carry"
Both done


### Promotion and release
Wikilink Soul Train on the img text
"the new single and was afterward scolded" → ""Golden Years" and was scolded afterwards"
Remove pipe on DJ
"to promote the single worldwide." → "for promotion worldwide."
Above four done
[3] should be at the end of the para's penultimate sentence too since it is the only ref used for that one
I'm confused by this. – zmbro (talk) 15:46, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
[3] is at the end of the first para's last sentence before [21], but it should also be invoked at the end of the previous one. --K. Peake 10:54, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
Like that? – zmbro (talk) 18:09, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
Spot on! --K. Peake 11:20, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
"Like "Rebel Rebel"'s relationship to" → "Like the relationship of "Rebel Rebel" with"
"for the album to come." → "for the then-upcoming album."
"of Bowie's tenth studio album Station to Station" → "from Station to Station"
Remove "later that month" since this is a new para
"on 21 November—while" → "on 21 November 1975 while"
"as the B-side and the catalogue number was" → "with the catalogue number of"
"It subsequently appeared as the second track on the album," → "The song subsequently appeared as the second track on Station to Station,"
"of the single" → "of fellow Station to Station track" removing the part in brackets from later on
"An updated single of" → "An updated single version of" or something similar
Remove pipes the Billboard Hot 100 since this will have been mentioned previously once the changes have been implemented
"It peaked at" → "The song further peaked at"
"Belgium Wallonia" → "Belgium's Wallonia region" to be specific; do the same for Flanders
"and was a top-ten hit in" → "alongside scoring top-10 positions in" per MOS:NUM
Above done


### Critical reception
Is it possible to add more reviews so an actual critical consensus can be reached?
I'll try – zmbro (talk) 15:46, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
Decent job here! --K. Peake 10:54, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
"gave immense praise" → "gave heavy praise"
Add [] around (1973) because the year is not written in the source's text
Wikilink Ultimate Classic Rock per MOS:LINK2SECT
"placed it at" → "placed the track at"
The "in 2020" part is not needed when we already two years later is from 2018 because of the previous sentence
"That same year" → "That same year,"
"voted it number 14" → "voted the track number 14"
Above seven done


### Live performances and subsequent releases
Pipe to Mini Tour should only be on the first word since otherwise, it reads as if that was multiple tours in 2000
Wikilink live album
Both done
The source provided for The Best of David Bowie 1974/1979 does not list the song
Was a different compilation, my bad.
"That same year," → "Also in 2016," because it is not clear which same year you are referring to here
Done


### Personnel
Pipe Moog synthesiser to Moog synthesizer
Pipe percussion to Percussion instrument
The production sub-heading has a small amount of content; maybe add producer to Bowie's initial roles under personnel and move Harry Maslin to being at the end of the personnel listed?
All done


### Chart history
Retitle to Charts, as this title implies there is a detailed history of the song's performance on charts
Done


#### Weekly charts
Maybe the 2016 chart positions should be in a separate table since there was a reasonable amount of them?
Done


#### Year-end charts
Good


### Cover versions and appearances in media
This section should be the one directly below live performances & subsequent releases
Remove the first sentence since this section existing makes that clear instantly
"Crackerjack! Pegg calls this rendition" → "Crackerjack!. Pegg calls the rendition" since an exclamation mark only works for ending a sentence when it is part of a quote
Wikilink closing credits
"while the original track" → "while the standard track" to avoid overusage of "original"
Above done
Should it be written as "appears" or "appeared" for the new remix?
Latter
"where the song gradually" → "where it gradually"
"that I know of."" → "that I know of"." per MOS:QUOTE
Both done


### References
Copyvio score looks great at 27.0%!!!
Invoke ref 2 in place of ref 5 since the former cites p. 237 too
Pipe Consequence of Sound to Consequence (publication) on ref 20
Stephen Thomas Erlewine should be author linked on ref 21 instead of ref 54
Invoke ref 23 in place of ref 13 since the former cites p. 288 too
Remove or replace ref 29 since KCRW lack an editorial team and the article is written by a guest
Ref 32 is missing a work/publisher
Shouldn't ref 33 use the exact work and publisher as ref 64 since it's the same website?
Ref 37 is missing a work/publisher
Mark refs 43 and 69 with url access limited
Wikilink Ultimate Classic Rock on ref 45 per MOS:LINK2SECT
WP:OVERLINK of Pitchfork on ref 52
Ref 56 is not citing the correct compilation album
WP:OVERLINK of PopMatters on ref 63
WP:OVERLINK of RPM and Library and Archives Canada on ref 65
The current title of ref 66 should be cited as work/website instead; use the actual title in the parameter
All done/fixed


#### Sources
Wikilink Virgin Books
Wikilink Da Capo Press
Both done


### Final comments and verdict
 On hold until all of the issues are fixed; this review went quickly! --K. Peake 20:00, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
It seems I really should have proofread this before nominating... – zmbro (talk) 15:46, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
Zmbro You should have especially in certain areas; I have left comments in response now! --K. Peake 10:54, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
Yeah ngl I'm kind of embarrassed regarding a few of these. I guess I should go back and check all the other current noms... – zmbro (talk) 18:09, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
Zmbro  Pass time, top job on working through all of this in a few days! --K. Peake 11:20, 14 November 2021 (UTC)