# Talk:Reflektor (song)

Is a step-by-step summary of the music video really necessary? Maybe a sentence or two.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.105.44.63 (talk) 18:33, 6 October 2013 (UTC) 

Why is this not stated clearly? A P Monblat (talk) 20:04, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Reviewer: Carbrera (talk · contribs) 20:51, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I am Carbrera, and I'll be reviewing this article for possible good article submission.
Full review coming very soon. Carbrera (talk) 20:51, 23 March 2016 (UTC)


### Infobox
An alt is required for the single cover image
 Done

Add quotation marks around "Instrumental"
The B-side is not a song titled "Instrumental"; it is the instrumental for "Reflektor". Therefore, there is no need for quotation marks.


### Lead
Add the album's year released in parentheses after the name of the album
 Done

What do you mean by a primary music video? Could you further clarify/rephrase?
 Done

State what critics praised about the song, perhaps they enjoyed the instrumentation according to what I've read so far?
 Done

Instead of stating where "Reflektor" peaked, you could state that it was commercially successful, peaking in the Top 50 in various countries... (Don't put exactly this, just consider it when rephrasing!)
 Done


### Background and recording
This section requires expansion; I think you could talk a little bit more about the recording process, especially with the Bowie article citations you provided
The transition from the first to the second sentence is quite abrupt; could this be changed so it flows/transitions more smoothly?
Instead of using 'contributions', could you say that "Reflektor" was written by... produced by... etc.?


### Writing and composition
Change to 'Composition and writing' since you speak of the track's composition first, primarily
This section also requires expansion, it is a bit too short compared to other GA articles around here
The quote used here is way too big, as it takes up 50% of the section's contents
Perhaps state who mixed it, any descriptions by critics, etc.?
Okay, so what I've done is combine the two sections, seeing as to how there isn't much else I can add to the sections. It fits fine for me, but if this wont work, I'll look twice for content I could add.


### Music video
Clarify which music video the image is from; interactive or live-action?
 Done

Where was the video released? On YouTube? On Vimeo? Etc....?
 Done

saying → stating
 Done

Once again, the quote you used in way too long and would qualify better as a block quote if you don't see shortening of the quote possible
 Done

Please talk more about the interactive music video if possible
There wasn't much else I could find about the interactive music video.

Towards the end of this section, you use "this video" twice in a row, could you do a switch for better flow?
 Done


### Critical reception
This section should be moved to above the 'music video' section
 Done

However, this section is superb and I see no changes that require your attention


### Packaging
#### Artwork
Add a source for the lead sentence please; I know it's true but nothing backs it up
The Discogs source at the end of the first paragraph sources the entire thing, to prevent over-referencing. If you want me to add a reference to the end of each statement, then I can do so.

You don't have to state and link all of the band members; I find it unnecessary; however, if you thinks its needed, I see no reason to argue with you
 Done


#### Fictional track listing
The discs need quotation marks around each title, if you even decide to still include the tracks found on the discs
 Done


### Track listing
Add the 'Merge / Sonovox' to the 'Personnel' section
I don't see why this is necessary.


### Personnel
Add the thing I mentioned above here
Rename to 'Credits and personnel'
 Done

Discogs isn't the most reliable source, were there liner notes on the single's CD cover?
 Done


### Charts
You could probably make a separate section regarding chart performance, ideally located between 'Critical reception' and 'Music video', and I also recommend you do so
If you take this suggestion, please expand as the song charted on several significant charts/countries
There's no reason why "Chart performance" should be separated from the "Charts" area. They're both talking about the same exact thing, so no need for separation.


### References
[9] - Unlink 'Rolling Stone'
[11] - Unlink 'NME'
[13] - Unlink 'Billboard'
[14] - Unlink 'Billboard'
[16] - Unlink 'Ultratip'
[17] - Unlink 'Billboard'
[23] - Remove the chart from the publisher/website
[24] - Remove the chart from the publisher/website
[25] - Remove the chart from the publisher/website
[26] - Remove the chart from the publisher/website
[27] - Remove the chart from the publisher/website
[28] - Unlink 'Billboard'
All  Done


### End of GA Review:
Overall, a pretty solid article that requires a bit expansion. I'm gonna put it on hold until the nominator can review my suggestions and make further changes. Carbrera (talk) 21:27, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Update #1 – fixes have been made. Aria1561 (talk) 03:46, 31 March 2016 (UTC)