Talk:Nadia Ali (singer)/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Canyouhearmenow 11:24, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Will start review on Monday --Canyouhearmenow 11:30, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
- I like the way you went in and cited the lead. I am a strong advocate of sourcing the lead to make sure people are automatically being taken into the article from the start. The lead always tells the story. It is better to have more sourcing than not enough! I have been reading through the article for that press release feel. I would suggest you read through it and if there is anything that jumps out at you that you may feel the reader might look at as a press release then you might want to think about a small rewrite. It isn't enough to really bring attention to itself. But there is the smallest feel to me.
- This article is very well written and the sources are substantial. I will give it a few more look overs and if I feel comfortable I will pass it. I will also be asking another reviewer to look at it to make sure I haven't missed anything. Great work!--Canyouhearmenow 12:22, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks! Based on what you said and what I saw on other good articles from the electronic music wikiproject, awards and chart position references seemed the most logical thing to do. I just had a read through again and the part I think might sound mostly like a press release is the one about Queen of Clubs trilogy. I've mentioned a whole list of DJs over there which might seem unnecessary but which I thought was essential given the nature of electronic dance music. Vocalists barely make a mark in the genre and it's always the DJ/producer who gets more attention. Nadia is unique in that sense because she's one of the few if not the only vocalist who has gotten noticed because of not just the collaborations she's done but also based on her solo work. That's why I felt it was important to mention at least some of the prominent ones which were a part of her trilogy because an EDM listener would definitely know these names. If there's anything else, I'm happy to have a look at making it sound more neutral.
- Also I've asked another editor, they said hopefully they'll have a look at the article by the end of the week. Hassan514 (talk) 04:35, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- OK Hassan514, you are off to a great start. I was getting ready to tell you that the next thing you needed to do was convert numbers into text> 2000=Two thousand, but I see you saw that before I needed to tell you. This is why I always tell the editor to go through the article and see if anything jumps out at them that a reader would think felt odd or question, then we really need to adjust or rewrite. Most of the time, the editor will find it on their own. I am one who feels the editor should own their work. I have to admit; the area where the DJ's are all listed is the area where I have the most issue. I understand that they were instrumental, however, how much of that is about Nadia herself. One factor to always remember when writing a story or inclusion. You have to look and ask yourself; if this material were not added to this article, would the reader still be able to understand or realize who the subject was? If you can still paint the canvas and people see the subject, then you may not want to muddy the picture by painting a duck in the background! I am just not sure that a complete list is necessary. Mention of a few key figures would be fine. Remember, Neutral is where we need to be at all times. Great work! --Canyouhearmenow 11:08, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, I understand what you mean. This was also told to me by other editors as well that it stood out a fair bit, so I cut down the list to some of the important ones. I have listed only 10 out of more than 40 who are on the trilogy. But I'll have a look at it again and see if I can cut it down further. The numbers was definitely a issue I didn't pick up. I had listed them as "No. 5" generally but someone else went and corrected but I only realised now they had only done it partly. Hassan514 (talk) 18:31, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- I would suggest that you look at the notable DJ's and pick two of them and then use verbiage that lets the reader know that there are other notable DJ's but these are two of the top. It is better to cut down that list. It in no way diminishes the importance of the others but instead it keeps focus on the subject which is Ali and lets the reader know that these DJ's were important in her climb. --Canyouhearmenow 20:30, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Done Just listed three of the most notable DJs and rephrased it to show others were involved. Hassan514 (talk) 22:35, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- Great! Now, I think the final thing that is bothering me before I can pass this article is under the heading of Influences. I understand that she had SEVERAL influences, however, to spell them ALL out is kind of irritating to the reader. Remember, this is an article about Ali not these other artists. I believe there is a better way to show these without spelling them all out. Many reviewers will tell you that it is better to go simple and let the reader enjoy the reading. When you have all of these artists spelled out like this, it takes away from her as the subject. We know she has influences, however just name a few of them in the article and let your source reference do the work for you. I hope that makes sense to you? Once that is done, I think we have ourselves a GA article! Thanks --Canyouhearmenow 22:50, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- I would suggest that you look at the notable DJ's and pick two of them and then use verbiage that lets the reader know that there are other notable DJ's but these are two of the top. It is better to cut down that list. It in no way diminishes the importance of the others but instead it keeps focus on the subject which is Ali and lets the reader know that these DJ's were important in her climb. --Canyouhearmenow 20:30, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, I understand what you mean. This was also told to me by other editors as well that it stood out a fair bit, so I cut down the list to some of the important ones. I have listed only 10 out of more than 40 who are on the trilogy. But I'll have a look at it again and see if I can cut it down further. The numbers was definitely a issue I didn't pick up. I had listed them as "No. 5" generally but someone else went and corrected but I only realised now they had only done it partly. Hassan514 (talk) 18:31, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- OK Hassan514, you are off to a great start. I was getting ready to tell you that the next thing you needed to do was convert numbers into text> 2000=Two thousand, but I see you saw that before I needed to tell you. This is why I always tell the editor to go through the article and see if anything jumps out at them that a reader would think felt odd or question, then we really need to adjust or rewrite. Most of the time, the editor will find it on their own. I am one who feels the editor should own their work. I have to admit; the area where the DJ's are all listed is the area where I have the most issue. I understand that they were instrumental, however, how much of that is about Nadia herself. One factor to always remember when writing a story or inclusion. You have to look and ask yourself; if this material were not added to this article, would the reader still be able to understand or realize who the subject was? If you can still paint the canvas and people see the subject, then you may not want to muddy the picture by painting a duck in the background! I am just not sure that a complete list is necessary. Mention of a few key figures would be fine. Remember, Neutral is where we need to be at all times. Great work! --Canyouhearmenow 11:08, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Done Makes sense! I've just listed down some of the influences she has repeatedly mentioned. And to most listeners, they will identify the styles of these artists in her music. Hassan514 (talk) 23:04, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- Congratulations! I have passed your article to WP:GA status. I want to thank you for all of your hard work on this article. This has been one of the easiest articles for me to work on reviewing. Keep up the great work and let me know if I can be of further assistance to you. --Canyouhearmenow 02:34, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks so much....I didn't expect it to go through this quick! I had a lot of help working on it with some great editors who helped me with what needs to be there and doesn't so I have them to thank for making your work easier! Thanks again for your suggestions and helping me getting this article to GA. Hassan514 (talk) 03:34, 23 June 2011 (UTC)