Talk:Voyeur (Kim Carnes album)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Sebbirrrr (talk · contribs) 23:20, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I'll be reviewing this article as part of the current backlog drive.

Infobox

Add alt for the cover
You shouldn't have refs in the infobox
The ref also doesn't state when the album was recorded

Lead

The lead is very short, there's no mention of the people she worked with, the grammy award nomination or the commercial performance of the album (or its singles) and more info could be added on its background and composition

Writing and recording

All paragraphs could be lumped into only one since they're not that long
"where Kim Carnes" → "where she"
Carnes' music was described as blending Ultravox and Spandau Ballet, they did not serve as inspirations for the album
"The next track Carnes recorded" → this should be removed as it begins with "next", when no other track was mentioned beforehand
The source does not state anything about Sue Saad and the Next or Crichton's film
"a song that she wrote by herself" → not mentioned in the source
I think it's worth mentioning why the children's choir was added
Link "Voyeur" the single
The source does not state when Turner demoed the song

Art direction

Getty Images is an image vendor and should not be used as a reliable source
The artwork description is original research
Per the comments above, this section should be deleted unless reliable sources are found

Release and promotion

The source does not give the album's release date
De-link "Voyeur"
There is no mention of the album's commercial performance
The singles' release and their commercial performance should have their own section
There's no source to back up "Voyeur"'s release date as a single
Remove "chart" after Billboard Hot 100
"charted in several European countries" → yet the source shows the song also charted in New Zealand
IMVDb hosts user-generated content (according to them: "whether you a production company, director, or a fan, you can help IMVDb grow") which anyone can edit, thus it should not be used a source
""Breakin' Away from Sanity", "Undertow" and "Take It on the Chin" were released as singles in select territories but none charted" → WP:OR and there's no source to back up the fact that they were released as singles and where they were released as singles
"Mulcahy directed another video for "Say You Don't Know Me", but the song was not released as a single" → WP:OR

Critical reception

This section should be renamed to just Reception
Link Mistaken Identity on the first occasion and its release year in brackets
"In the New York Daily News, Hugh Wyatt" → "New York Daily News' Hugh Wyatt"
"another album produced by Val Garay" link Val Garay
"In the Calgary Herald, Roman Cooney" → "Roman Cooney, writing for the Calgary Herald"
"that it is hard to determine" → "that it is "hard" to determine"

Industry awards

This should go in the Reception section as it's just one sentence

Track listing

Add that Val Garay produced all tracks

Personnel

Everything is fine here

Charts

Everything is fine here

Certifications

Everything is fine here

References

Copyvio score at 32.4%
For ref 3, the interview begins at page 36
Remove refs 5 and 10 per the comments above
Refs 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 and 24 should be tagged with the via parameter for newspapers.com and url-access=subscription
For ref 25, the page on where the grammy nomination is on is page 67

Outcome

Sadly this is a fail. The article contains original research and it needs more improvement and sources. The Writing and recording section is mostly based on one source, and it needs more than that. In the Release and promotion section, there is no mention of the album's chart performance and the gold certification it received, the information regarding the singles is also based on original research and lacks reliable sources. Best of luck, Sebbirrrr (talk) 10:24, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to review this, Sebbirrrr! It's a shame that the article doesn't meet GA requirements at this time but I agree with all your points and will set to work addressing each of them. Skyrack95 (talk) 15:38, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]