Talk:Amy Winehouse/GA2

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 14:39, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

I'll take this on. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:39, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

GA Table

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.	Needs a little work, see Comments. Now up to the required standard. Substantial further polishing would be needed for FA.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	lead: ok; layout: ok; weasel: ok; fiction: n/a; lists: n/a.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	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).	One missing, see Comments.
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Good focus and evenness of coverage.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Much recent editing but not too much debate.
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.	Most have explicitly been checked by robot or administrator. All are suitably tagged.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	An enjoyable and informative article with wide coverage and suitable sourcing.

Comments

Firstly, what a pleasure to review such an informative and well-constructed article.

• 'critically successful'. Perhaps 'liked by critics' as less like journalese.Y--Aichik (talk) 03:08, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

• 'to young Amy'. Perhaps 'to the young Amy': not over-keen on use of first names, though in the family context it may be the easiest solution - it could be avoided with 'to her when she was young', etc. Y--Aichik (talk) 03:08, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

• It doesn't matter here at GA but the references are not consistently formatted - some use cite format, some have hand-embedded URLs, etc, some use 'sfn' short format.

• 'It went to number one on the UK Albums Chart numerous times,' -- it stayed at #1 for a while, or it bounced up and down in the chart repeatedly? Maybe say how long it stayed there, or how many bounces it made. Y--Aichik (talk) 12:57, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

• 'because of the inclusion by her record label of certain songs and mixes she disliked.' Perhaps a tad klunky; maybe 'because her record label had included ...' Y--Aichik (talk) 03:08, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

• 'she'd put in on a CD and play it in his taxi' - I guess this is 'she'd put it on a CD...' (typo)

• Perhaps should avoid "she'd" also (that applies throughout the article).

Could you cite where in Wikipedia or other rules that says we can't use short forms? thank you--Aichik (talk) 03:08, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Let's not argue. I don't believe it's rigidly forbidden, just that it feels light in WP:TONE rather than encyclopedic; for the record, the style essay (it's not policy) says "in a businesslike manner", whatever that might mean. I shan't fail the article on such grounds, but I suspect any copy-editor would at once make the change.Y--Aichik (talk) 16:33, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

This has not been done - kindly do not strike my comments, that's my job. The question of tone may be relevant in future so it should remain on file.

• 'citing doctor advice to take a complete rest.' - maybe 'citing her doctor's advice...' or 'citing medical advice...'.

Y--Aichik (talk) 03:08, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

• 'She performed what was described as a polished set which ended with her storming off the stage. Her hour late arrival caused her set to be cut off at the halfway point due to a curfew.' So, she stormed off, or she was cut off? I think she was asked to stop and so stormed off - if so, please say so.Y--Aichik (talk) 03:08, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

• 'Universal Music pressed her regarding new material in 2008,' - perhaps 'pressed her for new material...'

Y--Aichik (talk) 03:08, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

• Jeff Zycinski said - citation needed. I fixed the reported speech.

• 'Other artists that have credited Winehouse as a major influence as well for paving the way for them include Emeli Sandé, Misha B, Jessie J, Paloma Faith, Lana Del Rey, and Florence Welch.' - perhaps 'who have...', and it's correctly marked as needing citations.

Y--Aichik (talk) 03:43, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

That's a big improvement, thank you.

• Other changes are being made to the article that do not appear to be in response to this GAN. If this instability continues the GA may well fail on criterion 3.5.

My emphases on the last so that others are also aware.--Aichik (talk) 02:52, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Many thanks. We're almost there, just a couple of items (above) to be done. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:42, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, too. I've been doing 2+4 for weeks. When I've time, I'll muck-in by: scanning 2b; then check/fix 2 and/or check/fix 4 (with the aim of leaving them in good-order or; flagging <dead link>/<fact>s and/or noting 'original research' (I guess it's best to start a talk for instances of OR). ... I hope that suits. Perhaps my Rel-yr:2013 tracks released this year radio _{catalogue control} will help work. :D – Ian, DjScrawl (talk) 19:27, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

My sense, DJ, is that it's fine at this point. We'll attend to again when we want to get this to FA status;)--Aichik (talk) 13:03, 3 November 2013 (UTC)