Describing the song as a "the centerpiece" of Back to Basics's second disc, About.com reviewer Bill Lamb gave the song a five out of five stars rating, commenting that the song "does not always fit easily into the typical pop radio, but it is a song that is very likely to generate significant listener requests." → If I remove the sentence that is between commas, the whole phrase makes no sense, who is commenting?
"over the top" (OTT)" → He didn't called it "over the top", he called it "OTT", then you can put between brackets (Over the top).
When the reviews change from "good" to "bad". You should say "In a mixed review, or in a negative review"...something in this vein. Otherwise, there is no division and it all seems good/bad.
"Rolling Stone magazine's Jenny Eliscu called "Hurt" an "incongruous schmaltzfest," while Thomas Inskeep from Stylus Magazine named "Hurt" an "overblown" ballad. The song was deemed by AXS as Aguilera's best song". → You have bad reviews getting worse and worse, which is great (for the article decadence, don't get em wrong) and then something like. "The song was deemed by AXS as Aguilera's best song", it disrupts the whole section. Besides that, when was it named the best song? Whe? In this album of all time?
I don't understand why there is a picture of her performing live the song in this section of the article.
I would expand it a bit more. With dates, peak positions in other countries, how many weeks it spent on the number one spot in US Hot Dance Club Songs. You could add the silver certification in the UK.
The music video for "Hurt" was shot over five days in September 2006. It was co-directed by Aguilera alongside Floria Sigismondi, who had previously directed the music video for "Fighter" (2003). The video's concept was described as circus-inspired. → The source doesn't back this up, the video has been removed.
"The video premiered on October 17, 2006 on MTV's Total Request Live" → same as previous.
"I definitely had a story for it – a specific story – that's why I felt that it was important for her and I to co-direct this particular video and song and she completely got it. She got my vision for it. She [Sigismondi] got where I was trying to go and what she brings to the table is so incredible and she's so creative and outstanding. And I always have a great time working with her. There was no ego involved, you know, me - that was the first video that I'd ever stepped up to the plate to literally co-direct. I'd always been very opinionated and very you know, I always voice my ideas and whatnot in my videos, but this was the first one I actually took credit for in co-directing. And she was just so great and generous in teaching me some of the ropes and learning about the different camera angles and you know, all the facets and details that go into making a video. So, she was really great and we had such fun with that. [...] And she's amazing. I can't you know, she came to the set dressed in different outfits that related to the circus everyday, so she's such an imaginative, creative spirit that I just have such fun working with energy like that." → This is just too big, reduce it's size.
"For the performance of the song, she dressed in a plume outfit designed by Roberto Cavalli and sang while a giant crescent moon descended from the ceiling". → The pictures that was above should be here and be careful with the size of it in order not to disrupt the next section.
You should add the reference in here as well, to back up those US sales.
Remove the platinum certification in US, since it has only been certified gold so far. Having sold one million copies is not the same as being certified by the RIAA.
I have to be honest it's the first time I see references with the name "Notes". You can put everything under References and when you have "Notes", replace it with "Footnotes" and "References" with "Sources".
Ref.13 → Musicnotes.com. Alfred Publishing, two works?
I could put this on hold and wait until you fixed these issues, since it's a very well rounded article. However there is a reason this article is a quick fail. I've used Earwig's copyvio detector, which claims 68.4%% confidence of a copyright violation. The other websites don't matter, the tool is not operating at 100%, only the one that has that percentage.
I would strongly suggest to submit this article to the Guild of Copy Editors after you address all the issues I have raised and explain to them what the problem is. I saw that in the second GA review of this article the reviewer also made the same suggestion but the nominator quite on the article. Once everything gets fixed I won't mind it review it again. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 21:37, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]