Talk:Grace Jones/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Wizardman (talk · contribs) 00:58, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this article shortly. Wizardman 00:58, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, reading through this article, I see some promise, but I also see a lot of issues that make this article short of GA status:

Three references in the first line of the lead isn't necessary. If the name and birthdate have to be reffed then they can be refed in the early life section.
"Jones and her siblings were raised by grandparents," were raised by her grandparents.
The section about Syracuse is confusing. Right now, it reads like she went to college at 16 at the latest. If so, that's worth noting in the article, and if not, that paragraph has to be restructured. Really, it should be anyway, since it's a bit haphazard, jumping to the play, new york, and to modelling very quickly.
"She signed on as a model with Wilhelmina Modelling agency. and took every opportunity to audition for parts in plays and films" should be a comma, not a period as is, but in reality the second half of that sentence is completely unnecessary and can be removed.
"She moved to Paris in 1970.[17][18] The Parisian fashion scene was receptive to Jones' unusual androgynous, bold, dark-skinned appearance" this bunch is one of my main issues with the article; you have two references for a rather basic fact, yet none for a sentence that certainly needs it, especially given the tone used.
"Jones was signed by Island Records" I feel like we're missing something, given that this is the very first part of the music career. Was she discovered? Was it a transition form the modeling? Right now it reads like she decided to do it on a whim one day or something.
"Originally appearing on the 1976 Italian film, Colt 38 Special Squad)" there's no left parenthesis in the article anywhere.
The second paragraph of Disco trilogy is completely unsourced. From here on I just skimmed and noted issues:
The second paragraph of Compass Point and the first paragraph of 1990s are unsourced.
"Jones is currently working on a new album with producer Ivor Guest, and on a book of memoirs, but meanwhile Universal Music Group will release a deluxe edition of her Nightclubbing album as a 2 disc set and Blu-ray audio on April 24, 2014. The set will contain all of the 12" mixes of singles from that album, plus two previoulsy unreleased tracks from the Nightclubbing sessions, including a cover of the Gary Numan track Me! I Disconnect From You." this reads like a press release, has some grammatical errors/typos, and can be condensed big time.
In the filmography, the notes section is blank throughout, so there's no point having it.
To me the names of the sections are rather long and could be trimmed a bit.
The personal life section seems unnecessary. The first para can be part of early life, and the second one can be merged in the appropriate timeframe as well.
"Jones's real last name is often referred to as "Mendoza". This in fact is not her last name but a name she used to fool her parents when she was in her early-twenties.[85]" If this is a name she used in her career or if there's more to the story, then expand on it. If not, it seems unnecessary.

The prose, while it needs work, isn't quite in auto-fail territory, but my main concern is the referencing, and that puts it into that level:

Just in the first ten references, I see a Wordpress and a Blogspot site. Those don't count as reliable sources. Neither does NNDB, which is near the end of the article.
Roughly 10-15 of the references are missing publisher information.
The dead reference is of questionable reliability and should be replaced.
Ref 44 (Images) is not only unreliable, but the domain is no longer in use.
There are multiple deadlinks: see here.
There's several other sources that, while technically show what they're referencing, aren't really good to use here. I see a pinterest ref on top of the earlier image ref, to use one example for that. Stick with news and book sources.

Overall, this article needs a lot of TLC to become a GA. It has a pretty good foundation, and some of the sections are in good shape. Others, however, struggle to keep up, and it does have a haphazard feel as a result. Due to this I'm failing the article, and would like to see all the above issues fixed before a renomination. Wizardman 01:24, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]