"as the second single from their second studio album, Astro Lounge (1999)" → "as the album's second
single" with the appropriate target
Done. Also corrected as this is the first single, not the second. ToaNidhiki05 13:19, 19 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Oh I didn't know that, why is the album page listing as second single though? Also, change to
lead single now with the wikilink. --
Kyle Peake (
talk) 19:38, 19 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Done. The album page is wrong. It considers a song that was released as a single from a soundtrack album months beforehand the "lead single", but it was never a single from the album and "All Star" is correctly identified by sources as the first single. ToaNidhiki05 21:39, 30 June 2020 (UTC)reply
"The song was one of the last" → "It was one of the last tracks"
"In writing it, Camp drew musical influence from contemporary songs from" → "When writing the song, Camp drew musical influence from contemporary music by"
""All Star" adopts a more" → "the song features a heavier" to avoid repetitive wording
I’m not sure the wording “features a heavier radio-friendly style” makes the most sense there? I did add the first part though. ToaNidhiki05 13:19, 19 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Maybe it doesn't; you should find a way to not repeat "more" in the same sentence either way though. --
Kyle Peake (
talk) 19:38, 19 June 2020 (UTC)reply
"received positive reviews from critics" → "received generally positive reviews from
music critics" with the target
The chart positions are out of order; you should mention that it reached the top 10 of lead charts first, then mentioned topping secondary US charts. Also, change "All Star" to the song in this sentence.
I’ve made a different change here - added (2001) after Shrek to match it with how Astro Lounge is listed above. Does that work? ToaNidhiki05 13:19, 19 June 2020 (UTC)reply
"and received renewed popularity in the 2010s" → "It received renewed popularity in the 2010s"
Are you sure the last sentence of this section shouldn't be in the following section instead?
Not sure what you mean here? It references the recording process, which is why I included in here. ToaNidhiki05 18:36, 28 June 2020 (UTC)reply
It is about who performes the whistling, which is part of the composition but not included in that section as of current. --
Kyle Peake (
talk) 11:59, 29 June 2020 (UTC)reply
I suppose the whistling could be mentioned in composition, but who performs it isn't really relevant there. ToaNidhiki05 21:40, 30 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Merge the following sentence with this one, since that should be done grammatically here; however, you can add more of what was praised in the lead instead
"than the songs on Fush Yo Mang" → "than the tracks on the album,"
Not sure this works here as the context is their previous album, Fush Yo Mang, not Astro Lounge, where All Star is from. ToaNidhiki05 15:15, 27 June 2020 (UTC)reply
You're right, keep as the album's title like it is but that comma is needed for grammar fixing. --
Kyle Peake (
talk) 11:59, 29 June 2020 (UTC)reply
"ranked it as one of the best songs" → "ranked the former among the best songs"
Not sure this is the best wording here, since there's no latter. ToaNidhiki05 15:15, 27 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Was thinking so, as a mention of "Maria Maria" is included, but context makes things obvious as to what "it" is in reference to. --
Kyle Peake (
talk) 11:59, 29 June 2020 (UTC)reply
"noted its lasting cultural impact" → "noted the song's lasting cultural impact"
"It has been certified triple platinum in the United States." → "It has since been certified
triple platinum by the
Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) for selling 3,000,000 certified units in the United States." with the target, and add the appropriate ref at the end of the sentence
"also achieved success internationally" → "achieved further success internationally"
"Top Singles chart[36] and numbers four" → "Top Singles chart, and numbers four"
[36] should not be mid sentence when it is at the end anyway
"It charted in the top ten in
Australia" → "It charted in the top 10 of
Australia"
"in the top 20 in" → "and the top 20 in"
"and in the top ten on the year-end" → "and in the top 10 of the year-end US"
Mention these as being year-end charts for 1999 at the end of the sentence
"in the year-end charts" → "on the year-end charts"
"ranking at numbers 31 and 4" → "ranking at number 31 and 4"
"It has been certified triple platinum in the United States.[47]" remove, since it is repeated entirely from the first para of this section
Mention what position it charted at on the
Rock Streaming Songs chart in 2017 with the appropriate ref, and wikilink to itself
"It ranked as one of the" → "The track ranked as one of the"
"of 2017 and 2018 and ranked" → "of 2017 and 2018, and ranked"
"year-end Rock Streaming Songs chart" → "year-end US Rock Streaming Songs chart"
I think I got everything except the 2017 RSS position, as I don't have a subscription to view the entire chart. I also added a few more missing chart refs.
ResPM come to my window 12:50, 20 June 2020 (UTC)reply
If you can't fix this, then why not just remove the 2017 info and only keep the other info about the chart? --
Kyle Peake (
talk) 17:14, 25 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Well, I was assuming someone else would take care of it, but I'll tweak the sentence a bit.
ResPM come to my window 17:27, 25 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Music video
"the music video features cameos by" → "the accompanying music video features cameos by"
"The video opens with the characters" → "The visual opens with the characters"
Why visual? Not familiar with that wording here. ToaNidhiki05 02:05, 26 June 2020 (UTC)reply
That term is often used an alternative for music video in these sections across Wikipedia articles. --
Kyle Peake (
talk) 11:59, 29 June 2020 (UTC)reply
This isn't possible with the links using the charts templates. ToaNidhiki05 02:34, 30 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Toa Nidhiki05 I understand you can't for things like CD releases, but many of the refs with URLs are missing accessdates and charts/certifications in tables can have them added. --
Kyle Peake (
talk) 07:24, 30 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Are you sure ref 8 is a reliable source since that's a blog? Also, add publisher.
It's reliable because it's an interview with Camp. His words are the reliable part. 02:34, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
Cite
Associated Press as publisher instead for ref 11 and remove Courier-Post altogether
Actually, I just realized it was wrong but in a different way. Cite news says you should list an agency and the newspaper for syndicated content, so I've corrected it to that. ToaNidhiki05 02:34, 30 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Remove target on Billboard for refs 19, 29, 39, 40, 41, 48, 49, 50, 51 and 94
Per
MOS:REPEATLINK, "there is no problem with repeating the same link in many citations within an article". ToaNidhiki05 21:33, 30 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Remove wikilink on Rolling Stone for ref 21
Per
MOS:REPEATLINK, "there is no problem with repeating the same link in many citations within an article". ToaNidhiki05 21:33, 30 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Wikilink Noisey to itself on ref 24 and remove the publisher
Per
MOS:REPEATLINK, "there is no problem with repeating the same link in many citations within an article". ToaNidhiki05 21:33, 30 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Remove target on RPM and delete the publisher for refs 43, 92 and 93
Per
MOS:REPEATLINK, "there is no problem with repeating the same link in many citations within an article". ToaNidhiki05 21:33, 30 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Ref 59 is missing a title or publisher and are you sure it's not unreliable since is from a blog?
I fixed the formatting issue. It's not a blog, it's from a rock radio station. ToaNidhiki05 21:33, 30 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Remove wikilink on Noisey for ref 60 and delete the publisher
Per
MOS:REPEATLINK, "there is no problem with repeating the same link in many citations within an article". ToaNidhiki05 21:33, 30 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Remove wikilink on The A.V. Club for ref 61
Per
MOS:REPEATLINK, "there is no problem with repeating the same link in many citations within an article". ToaNidhiki05 21:33, 30 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Cite WBUR-FM as publisher instead for ref 62 and remove the wikilink
Remove target on Polygon on ref 64
Per
MOS:REPEATLINK, "there is no problem with repeating the same link in many citations within an article". ToaNidhiki05 21:33, 30 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Remove targets on Interscope for refs 73, 74, 75, 76 and 77
Per
MOS:REPEATLINK, "there is no problem with repeating the same link in many citations within an article". ToaNidhiki05 21:33, 30 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Remove targets on CD for refs 74 and 75
Per
MOS:REPEATLINK, "there is no problem with repeating the same link in many citations within an article". ToaNidhiki05 21:33, 30 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Remove wikilink to United States on ref 74
Per
MOS:REPEATLINK, "there is no problem with repeating the same link in many citations within an article". ToaNidhiki05 21:33, 30 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Remove wikilink to Europe on ref 76
Per
MOS:REPEATLINK, "there is no problem with repeating the same link in many citations within an article". ToaNidhiki05 21:33, 30 June 2020 (UTC)reply
External links
Remove the music video since that is in the infobox