Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Lady Gaga/archive2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Sarastro1 via FACBot (talk) 16:04, 26 November 2017 [1].

Lady Gaga

[edit]
Nominator(s): FrB.TG (talk), IndianBio and SNUGGUMS 16:07, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about Lady Gaga, an American singer, who is known for her outlandish style and provocative work. She was arguably the world's biggest pop star around 2010. We have been working on this for a while now; it has been through two peer reviews, one in 2016 (which hardly went anywhere) and the other recently in September. Many thanks for everyone who turned up at PR which include @Mymis, Wehwalt, John, Ceranthor, and ArturSik:. FrB.TG (talk) 16:07, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Talk about taking the plunge! Let's hope for the best. Don't be surprised if I make other edits during this FAC. Snuggums (talk / edits) 16:08, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
We have been planning this since 2015; it's time we did this. Let's be prepared. :-) FrB.TG (talk) 16:10, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Good luck with this one guys, I really hope it gets promoted. I watched it evolve and it's a deserving FAC. ArturSik (talk) 23:12, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]

Images appear to be appropriately licensed. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:21, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Ceranthor

[edit]

Support on the prose per 1a. I helped copyedit this article during the peer review, and the nominators addressed a great number of my concerns with aplomb. Great work! ceranthor 21:40, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Ritchie333

[edit]

I don't know anything about Lady Gaga whatsoever, except just about everybody else on this planet does, and this is an absolutely worthy article to take to FAC - so now is an ideal opportunity for me to learn something about her. I'm not sure how much time I'll have, but I'll see what I can do

  • I've copyedited the lead a bit, feel free to revert to taste
  • "A popular contemporary recording artist" - Do we need this here? It's kind of stating the obvious; I generally prefer quantifiable facts such as chart positions and sales figures, which can't be quibbled with.
  • The third paragraph in the lead is a bit too "In 2011, Gaga did this. In 2012, she did that. In 2013 she did the other." I know when you're just trying to produce a basic set of major accomplishments, the prose can get a bit "list-y", but see if you can reorganise or trim things down. Something like "Her follow-up albums, Artpop, and the jazz-oriented Cheek to Cheek also topped the charts".

More later.... Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:04, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • The very first section of the biography cites 5 sources in quick succession. On the one hand, dropping inline citations in every few words distracts the reader; on the other, putting them all at the end would involve five citations. I'm not sure of a solution other than picking an alternative source that cites all of it (which may not actually exist).
  • I'm not too au fait on the suitability of US newspaper sources on BLPs - about what level is the New York Daily News? It's not highbrow broadsheet, but it's not celebrity trash either. As the facts cited are pretty innocuous, I don't see this as being a major issue.
  • I can't remember the guidelines for WP:LASTNAME, should we not be using "Germanotta" up to the point she started being known as "Lady Gaga"? Also, do we know why she chose the name?
  • Not sure about usage prior to adapting the name. As for choosing that name, I'm pretty sure it came from the Queen song "Radio Gaga", which either way is probably better for the next section when she started using it. Snuggums (talk / edits) 03:26, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "She began experimenting and taking drugs soon after" - unless I missed it, I can't see where in either source it says that Gaga was taking drugs.
While Gaga talks about drugs in the source, she does not imply she also took them. Removed. FrB.TG (talk) 09:42, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Herbert signed Gaga to his label Streamline Records, an imprint of Interscope Records, established in 2007" - when exactly was Gaga signed?
  • "At Interscope, singer-songwriter Akon recognized her vocal abilities when she sang a reference vocal for one of his tracks in studio." - lose one of the "vocal"s and what does "recognized her vocal abilities" mean here exactly?
Revised. FrB.TG (talk) 09:42, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "On YouTube, the video for "Bad Romance" gained the most views ever, and Gaga became the first person with more than one billion combined views." - lose one of the "views"
Revised. FrB.TG (talk) 09:42, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The inspiration behind the album came from her longtime friendship with Bennett" - this is in 2014, but the first mention of Tony Bennett is in 2011 - not really a "longtime friendship"
  • "In February 2015, Gaga became engaged to Taylor Kinney" - who is he? If he's not directly involved in her professional career, then perhaps this (plus the break up a year later) would be better off in a "personal life" section?
  • See the 2011–2014 section; they got together after he appeared in one of her music videos. Personal life section is asking for trouble as I'm absolutely certain it would become a magnet for trivia, fancruft, and gossip additions. Besides, there's not much to add for such a section anyway when the only relationships she's had that are him and Rob Fusari. Snuggums (talk / edits) 03:46, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The singer played a witch named Scathach in American Horror Story: Roanoke, the series' sixth iteration" - shouldn't that simply be "the sixth series"?
  • "Her role in the fifth season of the show ultimately influenced her fifth studio album" - how exactly? And why was it called Joanne?
  • To add to SNUGGUMS, I changed a bit to show that it was inspired by her aunt and influenced the music of this album. After that we move to the sales stats and all. —IB [ Poke ] 04:34, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The show attracted 117.5 million viewers based on American television ratings, exceeding the game's total of 113.3 million viewers." - I don't understand what this means.
  • "The performance resulted in 150,000 digital album sales for Gaga" - was the performance sold commercially (selling 150,000 copies) or was the increase in album sales a by-product of the Super Bowl performance?
  • "During her first set, the singer released the standalone-single, "The Cure"" - I realise you can do pretty instant things with downloads, but did she really release a single halfway through a gig?
But that's not what the prose says - it says "during her first set". What I understand by "first set" is something like a Grateful Dead concert (of which there are thousands available to listen to online), most of which consist of the band playing about 1-2 hours (first set), then a break, then the same again (second set). What Gaga's doing, however, is two back to back gigs, so it should say something like "between the two shows". Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:35, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A general comment - this is not a criticism as such but most of the sources I've looked at have been contemporary news reports, that have skirted towards (but not quite reached) tabloid journalism. Normally wouldn't complain but this is FAC, and I've got to consider criteria 1c. In mitigation, I think this is because unlike many articles I have worked on, Lada Gaga's notability entirely lies in the internet era, her career is in popular culture so that's where we're going to find the most information about her, all relevant facts about her are available online (via the Wayback machine if nowhere else), and a critically acclaimed biography of her life has not been written yet.

Well, that is true of most articles of contemporary artists. It is really an uphill task to write about them with the lack of literature and scholarly sources. I guess we just have to write from whatever we find. FrB.TG (talk) 09:42, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

More later .... Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:12, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I look forward to it. FrB.TG (talk) 09:42, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Any particular we have a Glass Spider era Bowie picture? Is Gaga more a Ziggy / Thin White Duke / Let's Dance / Tin Machine (delete as applicable) fan or does she just like Bowie generally?
The image was randomly chosen. In one source, she does say that she listened to Aladdin Sane when "finding her voice", but I wouldn't interpret it that she likes only that album. She is a fan of him in general.
  • "her debut album The Fame (2008) discusses the lust for stardom; ...." - why can't we just say The Fame at this point, if the user gets this far, they'll know what we're talking about, and if they've forgotten, it should be obvious from context. Same for other mentions of albums in this paragraph.
  • The impression I get from the "Musical Style and Themes" sections is that critical response to Cheek to Cheek was mixed. Is the Guardian source here truly representative of what people thought?
This is not a representative review (since many sources praised Gaga's singing abilities); also I am not sure we need reviews there since there are already two of them for C2C in biography section.
  • The section on "Videos and stage" is lacking a bit after 2011. Given we've just talked about Gaga reinventing herself all the time, we probably want to discuss later tours here as well.
This one is rather tricky. The performances or reinventions worth noting are Cheek to Cheek and her performance at the 2015 Oscars, both of which are already discussed in biography section. I am not sure if it is helpful to repeat them there.
  • "Certain media members have compared her fashion choices to those of Christina Aguilera" - what do you mean by "certain media members"?
  • Is there really a Guinness World Record for Largest Gathering of Lady Gaga Impersonators?
Yes, believe me.
  • "After all, Gaga, born Stefani Germanotta" - although this is part of the quotation, I don't see how it's relevant to the reader's understanding of Gaga's public image - I'd suggest trimming this bit out with a "..."
  • Gaga wore the raw beef outfit - Although there is a link, I have absolutely no idea what a "raw beef outfit" is - can you explain?
  • Partly awarded in recognition of the dress, Vogue named her one of the Best Dressed people of 2010 and Time named the dress the Fashion Statement of 2010 - lose one of the 2010s
  • it was also criticized by the animal rights organization PETA - why?
  • In July 2012, Gaga also co-founded the social networking service LittleMonsters.com, devoted to her fans - there is a easter egg link to Stan (fan), which needs explanation to non-enthusiasts
I have simply de-linked it; fan is a common word.
  • Gaga is an outspoken activist for LGBT rights worldwide - is "outspoken" the right word to use?
  • Halfway through the "LGBT advocacy" section, we announce, completely out of the blue, that Gaga is bisexual. If we had the "Personal life" section (see above), this could go here. Did Gaga come out at some point, or was she never "in" in the first place? Obviously, we don't want to go in to excessive detail here, but I don't think you have to be gay / bi / trans etc to support LGBT rights, so her support for this is a separate entity from her own sexuality. (For example, I'm not transgender, but one of my friends is and switching genders seems to have brought comfort and happiness into her life, so good for her).
  • I don't think she at any point tried to keep her bisexuality a secret, and do believe it prompted her advocacy for the community. Perhaps starting the section with something like "Gaga is bisexual, and *insert description on LGBT advocacy*" would work better. Snuggums (talk / edits) 13:14, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can we briefly explain what "don't ask, don't tell" without the reader having to look at another article to get an explanation?
  • While we're talking about LGBT rights, we should mention Gaga's criticism of Trump's military transgender ban. Come to think of it, Gaga has spent quite a bit of time this year Trump-bashing ([2], [3], [4]) (not that I have a hidden agenda against putting as much criticism of Trump in as many articles as possible or anything ;-)
  • On a related note, we should mention (with a suitable source, of course) Gaga's support for Hillary Clinton in the last election.

... and that's about it - I think once all the above issues are resolved, we'll be there. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:29, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ritchie333, thank you so much for such a thorough review. I have done most of the things above except where I have noted otherwise. FrB.TG (talk) 11:03, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, in which case it's a Support from me. Well done, chaps. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:03, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Ritchie333 for everything! Snuggums (talk / edits) 13:05, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Wehwalt

[edit]
Support I weighed in at the first peer review, here and it's had the benefit of additional reviewers since. Looks like it's to FA standard.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:15, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much, Wehwalt! Snuggums (talk / edits) 13:16, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much Ritchie and Wehwalt. Thank you Ceranthor also. —IB [ Poke ] 13:53, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sources review

[edit]
  • Ref 4: dead link
It was a wrong link. Corrected. FrB.TG (talk) 16:33, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 34: The source is a website – yet no link?
The official video is not available online, I don't think. FrB.TG (talk) 16:33, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 42: Link not working. I get the message "The address wasn't understood"
The iTunes link works fine, except that it is for the US. FrB.TG (talk) 16:33, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 46: needs a page reference
I don't have access to the source, but have replaced it with a Forbes source. FrB.TG (talk) 16:33, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 55: Who/what is "AXS" and why is this a reliable source?
  • Ref 67: Retrieval date missing. This is also the case with 117, 139, 148, 159, 197, 206 and 275, possibly others I've missed
Added, not sure how I missed these. Thanks for noticing them. FrB.TG (talk) 16:33, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Refs 115 and 116: "Top 40 lista" is not the publisher, which appears to be "slágerlisták" though as I don't speak Hungarian I can't be sure.
  • Ref 184: There's a red message that needs attending to.
Fixed - the archive URL contains odd characters that generate an error message on the URL, so I've taken it out. I don't know if that's what the nominators want though, so feel free to revert and fix properly if I've just made things worse. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 23:44, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It's totally fine; don't worry. The important thing is how the link actually works. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:58, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Refs 239 and 299: WP has a policy on tweets as reliable sources. See WP:RSSELF, which says: "self-published media are largely not acceptable. Self-published books and newsletters, personal pages on social networking sites, tweets, and posts on Internet forums are all examples of self-published media." Can you say why these tweets should be regarded as reliable sources?
  • That policy says that tweets are fine for non-contentious claims without any reasonable doubt of being true, which I can safely say applies to the former as it is the Guinness World Records announcing an achievement Gaga made in its records, but I've removed the latter as Ariana Grande doesn't quite say or even suggest that Gaga inspired her (contrary to what article text previously implied). Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:30, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise, the sources seem of appropriate quality and reliability, and are tidily presented. Brianboulton (talk) 21:47, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Aoba47

[edit]

As a fan of Gaga since her first album (makes me feel super old realizing it has been over nine years since The Fame was released), I would try to help out with this. My comments focus specifically on prose:

  • For this sentence (The same year, she played an unsuspecting diner customer for MTV's Boiling Points, a prank reality television show.), link “MTV”.
  • In this sentence (At Interscope, singer-songwriter Akon was impressed with her singing abilities when she sang a reference vocal for one of his tracks in studio.), there are few instances of the word “sing” in some capacity. I would change “sang” to something else to avoid repetition.
  • In this sentence (Despite her secure record deal, she said that some radio stations found her music too "racy", "dance-oriented", and "underground" for the mainstream market.), I am not sure about the phrase “her secure record deal”. What do you mean by this? Do you mean “Despite securing a record deal”? I think it can be revised to read better.
  • I am confused by the context in which the quote from the following sentence (The singer concluded: "My name is Lady Gaga, I've been on the music scene for years, and I'm telling you, this is what's next.”) was delivered. Where did she say this? Who did she say this to?
  • I would revise (the latter becoming the world's best-selling single in 2009) to avoid the misreading that it make the best-selling single of all time in 2009. I think “of 2009” would be more appropriate than “in 2009”.
  • Do you think that the Hitmixes should be mentioned?
  • I am not certain about this part ("The Edge of Glory", initially a commercial success in digital outlets, was later released as a single). “The Edge of Glory” was released as a promotional single and then upgraded to an official single so this part (was later released as a single) is a little misleading.
  • I also not certain about this part (accompanied by a music video that strayed from the "dramatic style" of her past efforts). The (the "dramatic style" of her past efforts) is rather vague and I am not sure if an unfamiliar reader would understand what it means. Also, it seems to an odd shortening of the history behind the video’s development (a more dramatic video was scheduled and then canceled and replaced with the one that we know). I think that this information could be presented better.
  • I would clarify that Eau de Gaga was released in 2014 as it is separate from the rest of the 2012 stuff.
  • Do you think that it is notable to include a part on the controversy surrounding the “Do What U Want” video, specifically her collaboration with Terry Richardson? It may be more appropriate to keep that information only in the article on the song, but I just wanted to raise this to your attention.
I also think it should be mentioned, but I'd like the opinions of @SNUGGUMS and IndianBio: on this.
In many cases, I feel such details are better for song article, but will have to give some thought to this one. Snuggums (talk / edits) 16:51, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I am honestly fine either way; this comment was more to bring it up to your attention. I understand and agree that some information is better kept in the article on the relevant song. Just thought it may be helpful to explain why the song never received a video and the promotion for the album kind of stalled after that. I am happy with any choice you make on this. Aoba47 (talk) 19:31, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • The chronology of the paragraphs involving Artpop seem a little odd. I do not understand why the information about “Aura” and its music video is included after information on “G.U.Y.”, ArtRave: The Artpop Ball, and the split from her manager as those all took place after the “Aura” music video.
I have included the music video for "Aura" there because it was released to promote Machete Kills, which released after these events. I added it also because I thought it would flow better this way.
  • I am still not entirely convinced about this though. Machete Kills was released on October 11, 2013 in the United States; "G.U.Y." was released as a single in March 28, 2014, the ArtRave: The Artpop Ball started on May 4, 2014 and ended on November 24, 2014 and she joined Artist Nation in June 2014. All of this happened in 2014, which was after the release of Machete Kills, the SNL performance, and the broadcast of Lady Gaga and the Muppets Holiday Spectacular. I would also put the Christina Aguilera remix of Do What U Want closer to the other sentence about the song. I am just not a fan of the chronology/timeline of these two paragraphs (i.e. the 2013 and 2014 activity) as it is unclear in my opinion. Also, Aguilera is now linked twice in the article. Aoba47 (talk) 16:54, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • The same comment as above applies to the placement of the sentence on her appearance on SNL to promote Artpop. I just think that the timeline gets a little too murky here.
  • For the part on Cheek to Cheek, I think that you should mention that two singles were released as part of the project.
  • Do you think it would be relevant to include a sentence on the reception of Gaga’s Sound of Music performance (i.e. from the media or from Julie Andrews herself) or information on her preparation for it?
  • For this sentence (Hotel is the fifth season of the horror show), I would change “horror show” to “anthology horror series” as the inclusion of the word “anthology” makes it clearer that each season is distinct from one another.
  • Do you think that it would be more appropriate to move this sentence (Her role in the fifth season of the show ultimately influenced her future music, prompting her to feature "the art of darkness”.) closer to the rest of the sentences on that particular season? Having the sentence right after one on a separate season and character is a little confusing.
  • Do you think that the music video for “John Wayne” should be mentioned?
  • Do you think that the commercial performance or critical reception of “The Cure” should be mentioned?
  • Do you think that it is worth mentioning the comparisons made between Aguilera and Gaga in terms of their music? I remember a lot of media attention around Aguilera’s album Bionic and if it was chasing Gaga’s sound, and that Gaga had even addressed it during an interview.
There was a sentence on "Not Myself Tonight" and its comparison to the video of "Bad Romance" in public image section, but I removed it as it belongs more in Aguilera's article more than here.
  • Do you think that Gaga’s duet with Aguilera on The Voice for Do What U Want should be included?
  • Do you think that information about Gaga’s performance during the hurricane relief concert and the image of her with the five former presidents should be mentioned?
  • ”Techno” is linked twice.
  • Do you think that a link for “feminism” would be beneficial?
  • For this part (After declining an invitation to appear on the single "We Are the World 25" to benefit victims of the 2010 Haiti earthquake,), did she offer a reason for declining the invitation?
  • For this sentence (Stylistically, Gaga has been compared to Leigh Bowery, Isabella Blow, and Cher), the references need to be put in the right order. The same comment applies to this sentence: (Gaga was inspired by her mother to be interested in fashion, which she now says is a major influence and integrated with her music.) and (She considers Donatella Versace her muse and the English fashion designer Alexander McQueen as an inspiration.).
  • The “disco” link could be moved up to this part (perky ABBA disco).

Wonderful work with the article as a whole. I enjoyed reading this and learning more about Gaga. Please let me know if any of my comments require further clarification. If possible, I would greatly appreciate it if you could provide comments on my current FAC: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sévérine/archive1? Either way, I will support this for promotion once my comments are addressed. Aoba47 (talk) 06:01, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If we're doing the "scratch my back and I'll scratch yours", I've got Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Carpenters/archive4 on the go. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:05, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can definitely review that FAC as well. I will wait until my comments here are addressed first as I want to make sure that this is complete. I will try to get to your FAC by the end of this week or the weekend. Aoba47 (talk) 16:05, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for providing these suggestions, most of which I have used except where I have noted otherwise. I will take a look at both of your nominations after finishing my review here. (I intended to post comments at the Carpenters FAC in a few days before this message). FrB.TG (talk) 16:33, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for addressing my points. Once my concerns about the Artpop section is addressed, then I will support this. Great work with this again! I would imagine doing work on an article about such a well-known figure would be difficult so hats off to all of you for that. Aoba47 (talk) 16:54, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Aoba47 and FrB.TG, let me take up the issue with the Artpop section. Aoba has a valid point regarding the chronology of the section and there's a bit of proseline effect I wanna eliminate. —IB [ Poke ] 19:05, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just wanted to add one more comment. I am not sure about this part, "As a bisexual", as it feels incomplete. I have never "bisexual" used as a noun so do you mean something along the lines of "As a bisexual woman"? Aoba47 (talk) 20:49, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Aoba and IB, I have rearranged the Artpop section a bit. Let me know what you think. FrB.TG (talk) 16:29, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I made some further small corrections, but I have to say FrB.TG, you did a much better job than I had imagined. Thank you Aoba47 for your comments and support. —IB [ Poke ] 05:05, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from ArturSik

[edit]
Agreed. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:09, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator comment: I'm conscious that this could probably be promoted now. However, it is certain to attract a lot of attention, particularly if it is ever TFA. With that in mind, and to allow other interested parties to comment if they wish, I will leave it open for a day or two more. I wonder if John or Mike Christie would care to have a look too? Sarastro1 (talk) 22:28, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps let John finish his review at Johansson FAC before pinging for this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FrB.TG (talk • contribs) 04:32, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to take a look here as I am almost finished over there. My router blew up on Friday though, so bear with me as I'm on a slow connection most of the time until the new one arrives. --John (talk) 16:54, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Mike Christie

[edit]

Reading through now; please revert my copyedits if necessary.

  • What does it mean to say that a performance "was a lo-fi tribute to 1970s variety acts"? The lo-fi article only talks about audio quality.
  • I wasn't sure what was meant by "reference vocal"; could this be linked to scratch vocal, assuming that's the intention?
  • The singer responded: "My name is Lady Gaga: There doesn't appear to be any comment she's responding to, except her own in the previous sentence. Who is she talking to in this quote?
  • Suggest adding the date the lawsuits were dismissed to footnote b.
    The lawsuit was filed and dismissed in 2010, so I have cut "March" from the sentence.
  • She yearned to make audiences have "a really good time" with Artpop, crafting the album to mirror "a night at the club". Saying she wanted audiences to have a good time seems like fluff; can we cut that phrase and combine the rest of the sentence with the previous one?
  • After spending much of her early life desiring to be an actress, Gaga starred in American Horror Story: Hotel. I think a sentence that makes a more direct connection between its two halves might be better. How about "Gaga had spent much of her early life wanting to be an actress, and achieved her goal when she starred in American Horror Story: Hotel?
  • Gaga performed live at several events in 2016: Doesn't really give us any information; I'd suggest cutting this completely and tweaking the following sentence as needed -- probably just "She sang the...", and changing to past tense throughout that sentence.

-- More to come. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:08, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your copyedits were fine, except a minor grammatical error you introduced, which I fixed here. I believe I have addressed all of your comments. FrB.TG (talk) 16:24, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Struck all but one above, and thanks for catching that. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:31, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing:

  • She has changed her vocal style regularly, similar to Madonna and Gwen Stefani: I don't see references to Madonna or Stefani in the sources cited, and in any case I think you could just cut the comparison -- without some more detail it doesn't tell the reader much.
  • Suggest "then-president" rather than "politician" for Obama.
  • a pledge of solidarity and activation: surely this should be "activism" or something similar?
  • ...making her one of the best-selling music artists. Some of her singles are among the best-selling worldwide. It's not clear what distinction is being drawn here.
  • ...Gaga is acknowledged as one of the few artists for propelling the rise in the popularity of synthpop: something's not right here. Probably should be either "one of the few artists responsible for" or "one of the few artist who propelled"; I think the former is a bit more natural.

Overall this seems in pretty good shape. The prose is clean; I wouldn't say it's remarkably engaging, but for an article like this is very difficult to get away from a sense of one achievement or event being listed after another, and I don't see any obvious improvements to be made. I expect to support once these minor points are fixed. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:53, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I have used all of your suggestions here. FrB.TG (talk) 17:02, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Just the "reference vocal" question left; I won't withhold support over that. Good work on a high-profile article. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 17:08, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much Mike Christie for that! Snuggums (talk / edits) 17:28, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Mike. —IB [ Poke ] 17:31, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support from John

[edit]

I peer-reviewed this recently and I think it is pretty much good to go. Let me give it a proper reading. --John (talk) 23:31, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

John I'm not sure how you are for time. I'm pretty happy with the level and depth of review here, and if there is nothing jumping out at you, I'm inclined to promote; any further polishing could take place on the talk page when you have a little more time. Let me know if you want a little longer to look, or if you feel it could wait until after promotion. Sarastro1 (talk) 12:40, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that seems reasonable. Let's go with that. Nothing major wrong here, let's promote. --John (talk) 13:01, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks, John, and I'm glad people feel this is FA-worthy! Snuggums (talk / edits) 15:00, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Closing comments: Some, but not all images have alt text. For consistency, it should be one or the other. While alt text is not an explicit requirement at FA, I always feel that we should demonstrate best practice. Also, duplinks need to be checked as we seem to have quite a few and I can't really see that we need them all. This tool will highlight any duplication and the main editors can decide which are necessary. But none of these things are worth delaying promotion over. Sarastro (talk) 16:04, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Lady_Gaga/archive2&oldid=1140386367"