Talk:All Red

This review is transcluded from Talk:All Red/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Hsnkn (talk · contribs) 22:54, 9 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Reviewer: RTSthestardust (talk · contribs) 00:07, 7 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Sup, fellow Carti fan RTSthestardust and I will give out my review on your nomination of "All Red". Will be there in a minute. - RTSthestardust (talk) 00:07, 7 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Hsnkn I have provided my insight and noted details that you will need to revise before I pass it. The most important parts are to remove the Genius citation (along with supportive evidence of it), use the Tidal citation for the song's length, confirm its exclusion with the Music Tidal citation, and develop/source the commercial success part of Reception. There are several small prose issues I want you to fix. - RTSthestardust (talk) 00:33, 7 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Hsnkn Hello? I see you made two edits on 8/8. Are you responsive? - RTSthestardust (talk) 06:35, 9 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I must have missed your notif while I was clearing them. I'll get started on this in a day or two. Hsnkn (talk) 16:07, 9 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Hsnkn Hello? It's been a week. - RTSthestardust (talk) 19:53, 16 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Hsnkn Due to a lack of response despite being active, I am going to fail this nomination. RTSthestardust (talk) 04:24, 22 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

• I would not consider using Genius, as it's clearly not a reliable source, even for news reports. Remove any info that is supported by the Genius source.
  • Update, I was fine with the use of Genius during my review for Blink-182's "I Miss You" as it was an interview. However, it's highly speculative on what news Genius publishes and a lot can be unreliable.
• Use the Tidal citation after the first sentence that explains its length on the "Composition" section
• For the claim of "All Red" being excluded from the track list of the album on the "Release and promotion" section, at least use a citation of the album's Tidal page to prove so.
• All of the charts besides the US are not sourced on the "Reception" section. Also explain the commercial success of the single in other countries from the chart template that were not mentioned on "Reception"

• Remove "duo" before Ojivolta in the lead (it may confuse some readers and is not needed; they're listed under producers)
• Revise "Notable is Playboi Carti's vocal performance, which continued his usage of a deeper delivery than his signature "baby voice"." --> ""All Red" features Playboi Carti's usage of a deeper delivery rather than his signature "baby voice"."
  • It's better to remove "notable" because that could be less neutral at times.

• Add a comma after "Future" in "slightly higher pitch than Future but was..."
• Replace "meanwhile" with "while" on the last sentence of its second paragraph.

• Revise "cover and a at club" --> "cover, and visiting a club"

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Small prose issues that need fixing.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Similar to 1a; use the revisions I stated above.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Good use of references except for Genius (which is unreliable) and that a few things need confirmation.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Generally good
	2c. it contains no original research.	Time length would need confirmation (once you remove the Genius source), so would it's exclusion from Music and commercial success outside the US
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Highest copyvio is 25.9%, which is decent.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	The lead, background, composition, release/promotion, reception, visualizer, personnel, and charts are well addressed; charts besides the US need confirmation as well as more info about it
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Evenly consistent
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	No issues here.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Your percentage takes up 62.6% of the whole authorship; also very stable
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	There are two free-use files with proper sources and rationales.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Good description for Future's image, but I also recommend the album cover having alt text due to its unique design
	7. Overall assessment.	Failed due to no clear action in two weeks despite activity and once commenting that they will get on work at it/