Talk:Golden Years (David Bowie song)

Please go to

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)[reply]

This review is

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)[reply]

Good Article review progress box WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

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

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)[reply]

• 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)[reply]

• Fixed. – zmbro _(talk) 18:09, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• "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)[reply]

• Kyle Peake How's that look? – zmbro _(talk) 20:13, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Quite good, reworded it though to be a bit smoother. --K. Peake 11:20, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• "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)[reply]

• 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)[reply]

• Done. – zmbro _(talk) 18:09, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• 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)[reply]

• "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)[reply]

• [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)[reply]

• Like that? – zmbro _(talk) 18:09, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Spot on! --K. Peake 11:20, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• "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)[reply]

• Decent job here! --K. Peake 10:54, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• "gave immense praise" → "gave heavy praise"
• Add [] around (1973) because the year is not written in the source's text
• Wikilink
  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)[reply]

• It seems I really should have proofread this before nominating... – zmbro _(talk) 15:46, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Zmbro You should have especially in certain areas; I have left comments in response now! --K. Peake 10:54, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• 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)[reply]

• Zmbro ✓ Pass time, top job on working through all of this in a few days! --K. Peake 11:20, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Vaticidalprophet (talk) 05:20, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that in 1975,
  Titan Books
  : London (2016). 978-1-78565-365-0, pp. 565–566

Improved to Good Article status by Zmbro (talk). Self-nominated at 03:36, 21 November 2021 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral : Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith Interesting:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: AGF on a book source. Note: I examined the Earwig match to this website and found that it was a reverse copyvio; the website copied from the Wikipedia article without attribution. No QPQ needed as nominator has less than five credits; good to go. DanCherek (talk) 06:43, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]