Jump to content

Talk:Entertainment/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Wadewitz (talk · contribs) 23:17, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review in progress. Wadewitz (talk) 23:17, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Need to do for GA

  • Copyediting. In general the article is written well, but I found myself starting to want to copyedit as I was reading. This article needs a thorough copyedit. Here are some examples:
    • People probably started entertaining themselves by telling stories around a fire in prehistoric times, and storytelling has been an important part of most forms of entertainment ever since. Stories are still told in this original form, for example while camping or when listening to the stories of another culture as a tourist. Entertainment is provided for mass audiences in purpose-built structures such as a theatre, auditorium, or stadium. One of the most famous venues in the Western world is the Colosseum where spectacles, competitions, races, and sports were presented as public entertainment. - This paragraph lacks cohesion - switches topics in the middle. All of the paragraphs at the beginning of the "History" section are like this - they need to be better ordered. Look for this problem throughout the article.
- Rewritten. These problems result from the long development period of this article and its complexity Whiteghost.ink (talk) 02:46, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Radio and television, often broadcast live, is a 20th century version of theatre entertainment that exists alongside the traditional forms.[70] Plays, musicals, monologues, pantomimes, and performance poetry are examples from the very long history of theatrical entertainment and performance art.[71][72][73] Stand-up comedy is a type of performance usually given in a theatre.[74] - This paragraph is just a list - there are several like this. Fleshing out the paragraphs like this will make the article better.
- Rewritten this and am developing it. Have to be careful with "fleshing". The trick is not to write what ought to be in the article on the form itself. For example, this article should not include too much of what should be in the article "music" or the article "dance". Also, for the same reason, it needs to focus on the audience, rather than the form, which is why the images, as much as possible, are chosen to show the audience being entertained rather than the form itself. Sometimes this objective is compromised by the other effort to show a wide cultural or historical range (breadth and depth). Whiteghost.ink (talk) 00:23, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • One-sentence paragraphs should be avoided.
- Done. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 00:23, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Avoid bullet points, as in the street performance section.
- Done. The street performance section has been rewritten to tighten it and remove the bullets. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 09:21, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Organizational structure. I'm not sure that all of the sections are necessary. For example, the fireworks section seems out of place, as it is about the same size as dance. Dance seems much more important. I would try to combine some of the sections or perhaps delete a few. For example, could "Circus and animals" be combined? "Revelry" is also hard to get a grip on. Perhaps just a large "fairs" section?
- "Animals" seem to have had a usage in entertainment quite independent of circuses and their involvement has been even more controversial in general entertainments than in circus entertainments. For example, horse racing is a serious industry and a major source of entertainment. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 03:39, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- "Revelry" started out as a section on the the hazards of entertainment, especially at big concerts. The heading has been changed to "Safety" to better reflect this section's purpose. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 03:39, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The "Fairs" section has a different focus from the "Safety" section. The article is trying to show how they developed from the early market fairs, which also provided entertainments, to the big trade fairs, which had a similar mercantile purpose and also provided entertainments but grew much, much bigger. Both the local, small type and the huge, global type are still going strong. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 09:32, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I see. I feel like the section headers for this article are very difficult to decide on. Wadewitz (talk) 19:25, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Images. I would recommend far fewer images - the galleries make it hard to see the flow of the article. Also, make sure that every image has a very descriptive caption.
- I agree that the galleries interrupt the flow of the text but I worked hard on selecting the images, so that they would: a) provide a representative view of the breadth and depth of this topic; b) allow readers to recognise their own culture in the article; and c) be directly transferable if the article was translated.
So, as a solution, I have tried out drop down galleries for the sections that needed a range of examples, such as the different types of engagement that musical entertainments offer and the fact that banquets have been an important entertainment in every century and culture. (The Banquet gallery manages to show ten centuries and ten cultures, which I think is a good thing). Do you think the drop down solution works? Whiteghost.ink (talk) 00:23, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think that is a very good solution, yes! Wadewitz (talk) 19:27, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

General comments on the article

  • When talking about how entertainment changes, you might also mention how what is considered entertaining in one culture is not considered so in another part. So, for example, dancing has been banned in several cultures.
- There was already a point made about how "Society's attitudes to female dancers depend on the culture" with a reference to an analysis of this issue in a book chapter. However, I have developed this section and provided a number of examples where dances or dancing has been banned. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 06:54, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The architecture section definitely needs expansion.
- Done. This section is expanded and divided into architecture FOR entertainment and architecture AS entertainment. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 02:21, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The "Electronic media" section seems to tilt the article towards a modern bias.
- It is not so much a modern bias as an attempt to show the issues that are currently affecting entertainment, which are largely technological ones, while the forms remain basically the same. I have separated the components of this section to show the main issues. It would be unbalanced not to try to address this set of changes and their impact. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 03:39, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This makes more sense to me now. Thanks! Wadewitz (talk) 19:37, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • What about a video and audio clips, especially in the music section?
- Two audio clips added - one showing the reaction of a notable composer to the idea of recording music, and the other showing the normal reaction of audiences to entertainment. The challenge, as with all this article, is not to privilege one form over another and to continue to represent the audience being entertained, as opposed to the form itself. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 03:39, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Video clip of McKinley's inauguration completes the parade section - it shows a different type of ceremonial, shows a parade on horseback and is both rare and short. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 08:27, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- A video of a large audience's response to a performance would be appropriate (still looking for a good one) but a music video of any particular performer or performance would be hard to justify - specific types should go in the articles about the performer or the genre etc. Here, I think we should focus on the entertainment effect on the audience. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 08:29, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It is good that you have such a strong conceptual view of the article. It really helps you keep it under control! I'm going to recommend that strategy to others working on similar articles. Wadewitz (talk) 19:37, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Overall, the largest issue I see with this article is that many sections broadly define the type of entertainment they are discussing and then make reference to one or two examples. It is hard to know why these examples and not others were chosen. The representativeness of these examples is not assured and the history of change over time is lost. GA is not require this depth of research, but it is something that the editors should be aware of. It is also gives the writing a very stilted feeling.
- On the point about why an example is chosen, I have tried to select examples that show a different point about the idea of entertainment on behalf of the whole article, instead of repeating things. The idea is to make it a coherent overview with as rich a set of links as possible. Some comments on the principles behind the choice of structure and content are on the article's Talk Page. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 00:23, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- On the point of change over time, what seems apparent as I work on this is that mostly it hasn't. The history in continuous and I have tried to show that in each section. The main change comes with the technology that is in the last section and even then it's only a medium - the forms seem to be the same as ever. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 00:23, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This may just so my bias as well - I'm interested in historical difference. :) Wadewitz (talk) 20:51, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I hope this is helpful and please feel free to ask me any questions you might have! Wadewitz (talk) 20:35, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will read over the article again today and tomorrow. Wadewitz (talk) 18:44, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really see anything "likely to be challenged" in those sections, myself. If you intend to take this to FAC, however, you'll have to add citations to those sections. Wadewitz (talk) 19:41, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I have developed the Circus and Magic sections and added some references to show the linkage with, and differences from, the earlier forms of this entertainment. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 01:54, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I have added further comment and a reference to the Safety section. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 10:17, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I have restructured the theatre section a little to put the Greek tradition more logically first and added another reference. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 12:36, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image copyright check - I just checked the images quickly for basic copyright compliance. There are several that need some attention. Note that many of the images will need their details enhanced if you go for FA.
- Image exchanged. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 02:21, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • File:Phoenix ThomasMars1.jpg
      • This was uploaded directly to commons with a free licenses, and includes EXIF data, so it seems fine to me. Are you worrying that it might have been stolen from somewhere else without permission? I checked TinyEye reverse image search and came up with nothing (not even Wikimedia, oddly...) [1] Wittylama 23:43, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Jumping in randomly... using Google Images' new TinEye-like search (click the camera in the search box) the image does appear here. Hover over, and it includes (C) logo, for "Andrewn551". The Wikimedia upload, which is larger, credits an Alex. Not sure how a larger version of the image would be lying, but conflicting names. -- Zanimum (talk) 01:33, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • Indeed - very odd. But well found. The Wikimedia Commons image is, like you say, much larger than the one on that website. Also, the name Andrewn551 appears to be credited in several of the blogpost at that website[2]. Given that the Commons version is 4,368 × 2,912 pixels, file size: 4.46 MB then that is likely to be the original image - direct from the camera that took it. I'm guessing, but my hunch is the Commons version is the original and the other website is the copy. Wittylama 06:08, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I take it then that the crowd surfing image is okay as it would not be possible for this high res version to be a copy of the low res version. I wanted to include this image because it provides a good example of a level of audience participation in musical entertainment that is hard to illustrate. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 11:49, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Could someone fill out the basic summary info, then? Thanks! Wadewitz (talk) 18:46, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I have replaced the Ancient Eqyptian banquet scene with another. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 10:00, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I have replaced the image with the newer version - better quality and attribution. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 09:03, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Once these are fixed, GA is yours! Wadewitz (talk) 20:42, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

- All suggestions have been incorporated now. Thanks for your time and attention. I hope our readers find it informative and encyclopaedic! Whiteghost.ink (talk) 12:36, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Entertainment/GA1&oldid=1047594049"