Jump to content

Wikipedia:Peer review/Cher/archive2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cher

[edit]
Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

Comments from GabeMc

[edit]
General
[edit]
  • Make sure the images in the article have alt text.
I will work on that too. Lordelliott (talk) 03:21, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move and/or merge. - There is currently both a "Bibliography" and a "References" section. Seems like the Bibliography is more of a "Further Reading" section, or perhaps a list of books that should be worked into the "References" section.
I will work on that. Lordelliott (talk) 17:48, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bibliography trim and merge. - 1) I suggest that you drop both Cooking for Cher and Mixed: Portraits of Multiracial Kids as Cher is not an author of either book (forewords and afterwards don't count). 2) If the other two book she co-wrote are described in the article body (they should be if they aren't now) then you should delete the section altogether.
  • There are several instances where text is sandwiched between images and/or quoteboxes, avoid this.
If needed, yes. Keep the best ones that are either free-use or will pass WP:NFCC. Also, you could consider reducing the longest quoteboxes into blockquotes as a tactic for avoiding the sandwiching of text. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 07:54, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The: "I could do a whole album with Snuffy [Garrett] in three days" quote could be worked into the prose at the appropriate place using {{Quote| TEXT }}. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 08:58, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Reduced three quoteboxes into blockquotes and deleted one. Also, is the clear left template really necessary? Lordelliott (talk) 17:30, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Re: "is the clear left template really necessary". No, but I think it makes for a less cluttered and cleaner look when used effectively. Other may agree or disagree but by all means, feel free to remove it. I would suggest taking another good luck at the "early life" material, and see if you missed any good bits from the sources that could be added to the section, which is a bit small IMO. This would eliminate any need for a clear in that section. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 03:49, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Other users found this section overlong, so I am a little bit confused, but I will take a look. Lordelliott (talk) 07:24, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Added some new info on the "Early life" subsection. Lordelliott (talk) 17:20, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've made some more research and added a few interesting bits of info from her early life. I think this subsection is pretty tight and covers all the main points of her early life well. If you still think it needs expansion, would you mind pointing out the kind of information you'd like this section to cover? Lordelliott (talk) 19:48, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Looks fine to me. Thanks! Lordelliott (talk) 03:50, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This section looks quite good now. Well done Lordelliott! GabeMc (talk|contribs) 23:08, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! :) Lordelliott (talk) 05:35, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Capitalisation:

The Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Music#Capitalization states:

  • "Standard English text formatting and capitalization rules apply to the names of bands and individual artists".

The Wikipedia:Manual of Style (music) states that a lower-case definite article should be used in band names:

  • "Mid-sentence, per the MoS, the word 'the' should in general not be capitalized in continuous prose, e.g. 'Wings featured Paul McCartney from the Beatles and Denny Laine from the Moody Blues.'"

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (music)#Capitalization states:

  • In band names, and titles of songs or albums, capitalize all words except:
Currently, (particularly in the 1960 section) the definite articles in band names are uppercased throughout, e.g. The Ronettes, The Righteous Brothers, The Supremes and The Beatles. Bring your capitalisation in-line with the Wikipedia MoS.
 Done. Lordelliott (talk) 22:21, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Internal citation consistency. Per: "Cher found the experience traumatic.<ref>{{harvnb|Bego|2004|p=10}}</ref><ref name="Berman Pg. 18" />". Use either {{harvnb/sfn}} or <ref></ref>, but not both ''except'' for cases where the source is used only once or twice.. I highly recommend that for any source used more than two or three times you should use the harvnb/sfn template style. It's my own personal choice that I also feel makes it easiest for our less experienced users to add properly sourced material.
  • Look here for an example of how the sourcing could be simplifed/improved and made consistent. This will trim the overall size of the article and increase its load time. You can use sfn unless you need to bundle cites, then use harvnb and ref tags. For another example see: <ref name="hollywoodsongsters-p151">{{harvnb|Parish|Pitts|2003|p=151}}</ref> There is no need to name a templated cite, {{sfn|Parish|Pitts|2003|p=151}} is more than enough. Is this more clear? GabeMc (talk|contribs) 23:30, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, I usually will have a citations, sources and a further reading section, which ideally should include any video documentaries which you think might be helpful to a reader wanting to learn more about Cher. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 23:32, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Right. You observed that the "Bibliography" section (now named "Sources") "is more of a 'Further Reading' section, or perhaps a list of books that should be worked into the 'References' section." Actually, the "Sources" section is a list of books that were used twice or more on the "Citations" section. Am I being clear? If so, do you still think the books on the "Sources" section should be worked into the "Citations" section? Lordelliott (talk) 00:08, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps we are misunderstanding each other here. The "sources" section looks fine to me now, though if you prefer to call the section "References", that's your personal choice. I prefer "sources" to "references" as a header title, but either is acceptable. To clarify, your citations and your sources should be two different sections, so none of the books need to be, nor should they be "worked into" the "citations" section, which isn't really possible anyway. "Citations" are references to specific locations within a "source", though some cites are also references to sources, but using them only once or twice does not justify adding them to the "Sources" section per se, though you certainly can if you want to. Some prefer to add each and every source used to "Sources" and link via template to each regardless of the number of times the source is cited. I only add a source to the "Sources/References" section when I intend to cite to it more than twice in the article. Is this point more clear now? GabeMc (talk|contribs) 01:36, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • It was my fault, I thought you said that the books on the "Sources" section should be worked into the "Citations" section even when they are used several times on the article. Now I get it. Lordelliott (talk) 03:47, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would consider removing the awards infobox as excessive. All this material should be described and sourced in the article body (in "Artistry" it looks like) and there is no need to use it here. Then the image of her from 1960 could be moved up and the clear removed.
  • Sourcing, re: multiple cites. - Now that you have converted the cites to harv/sfn templates, consider bundling multiple cites, adding notes to differentiate. E.g. "Jackie Jean Crouch was an occasional model and bit-part actress with Irish, English, German, and Cherokee ancestry.[1][2][3]"
Bundle the multiple cites alphabetically by the author's last name and indicate specifically what they are verifing. Ala, <ref>{{cite web|last=Cheever|first=Susan|url=http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20110424,00.html|title=In a Broken Land|work=[[People (magazine)|People]]|date=May 17, 1993|accessdate=October 28, 2012|publisher=[[Time Warner]]}}: Crouch's German ancestry; {{harvnb|Bego|2004|p=11}}: Crouch's Irish and English ancestry; {{harvnb|Berman|2001|p=17}}: Crouch's Cherokee ancestry.</ref>. Of course, if one reliable source covers Crouch's Irish, English, German and Cherokee ancestry, then the other two can be removed.
The multiple sources in this case covers the following sentence: Her father, John Sarkisian was an Armenian American truck driver with drug and gambling problems, and her mother, Jackie Jean Crouch was an occasional model and bit-part actress with Irish, English, German, and Cherokee ancestry. This is a very long sentence and I don't know how to write consistent notes to it on the citation. Can you help me? Lordelliott (talk) 03:52, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, I am more than happy to help. What specifically are you unsure about? Perhaps it would look more like:
  • <ref>{{cite web|last=Cheever|first=Susan|url=http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20110424,00.html|title=In a Broken Land|work=[[People (magazine)|People]]|date=May 17, 1993|accessdate=October 28, 2012|publisher=[[Time Warner]]}}: Crouch's ancestry; {{harvnb|Bego|2004|p=11}}: John Sarkisian's profession and personal problems; {{harvnb|Berman|2001|p=17}}: Jackie Jean Crouch's profession.</ref>. Just let me know which aspects of this point that I need to clarify further. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 20:04, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Two sources are used in this case: Cher's father was rarely home when she was an infant, and her parents eventually divorced when she was ten months old. They would marry and divorce twice more over the years. The first one ({{sfn|Parish|Pitts|2003|p=147}}) covers all the info except for the "ten months old" detail, which is covered by {{sfn|Berman|2001|p=17}}. How should I bundle these sources? Lordelliott (talk) 20:10, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
<ref>>{{harvnb|Berman|2001|p=17}}: Cher's parents divorcing when she was ten months old; {{harvnb|Parish|Pitts|2003|p=147}}: Cher's father was rarely home when she was an infant. Her parents would marry and divorce three times.</ref> Or similar. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 05:34, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks man, I will work on that. Lordelliott (talk) 16:54, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Bundled the multiple cites on the "Early life" section. Can you tell me if I did it right? Lordelliott (talk) 20:08, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Also, what should I do when a multiple cite is used again on the body of the article? Lordelliott (talk) 20:12, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
1) Looks great, nice work 2) If the exact multi-cite is used again, you can simply name it, such as: <ref name="CSGL">{{harvnb|Smith|2012|p=1}}: German; {{harvnb|John|2011|p=2}}: Armenian.</ref>. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 23:07, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not the exact multi-cite but a ref bundled with others. (Not sure if I'm being clear) Lordelliott (talk) 04:27, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If by "ref" you mean an article or website citation or the like, you can add any source to "Sources" and as long as you add the "ref=harv" field you can cite to it in the same way as any book source. Feel free to give me a specific example if this point is still unclear. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 04:40, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Very valuable help!! Thanks a lot! Lordelliott (talk) 06:09, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've made some more work on that. Could you review it to me? Lordelliott (talk) 06:49, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How can I refer to a cite on the "Sources" section when it doesn't have an author? (as the RIAA website) Lordelliott (talk) 18:43, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Infobox. - In the "Also known as" field, would it suffice to say she is known as Cher only?
  • I think so, but I'm not sure. She was refered to as Cher Bono very often in the 1960s and 1970s; her name on her first albums was printed "Chér"; and Bonnie Jo Mason and Cleo were her first stage names. Also, according to some sources she was born Cheryl Sarkisian. What do you think? Lordelliott (talk) 04:27, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ampersand use. Per MOS:AMP, "Retain ampersands in titles of works or organizations". I assume this also applies to groups, perhaps not, nonetheless, the current useage in the article is inconsistent. E.g., from "1960s", "In late 1964, they emerged as a duo called Caesar & Cleo", "By early 1965, Caesar and Cleo had begun calling themselves Sonny & Cher", "Sonny and Cher's first album".
Sourcing
  • Bare urls/incomplete cites. Current refs: #138, #226, #256, #272, #274, #279 and #280 need tidying up.
  • Lose the bullett points in cites #72 and #109.
Lead
[edit]
  • Vague/WP:OR? - "Recognized for having brought the sense of female autonomy and self-actualization into the entertainment industry". Question: Where in the article body is this point explicated and sourced?
    • "Female autonomy": Cher's star image, according to author Yvonne Tasker, "operates in terms of a refusal of dependence on a man and the determination not only to forge a career (as an actor) on her own terms but to refuse the conventional role assigned to women over forty years old in a industry that fetishises youth."
Stephanie Brush of The New York Times wrote that Cher "performs the function for women moviegoers that Jack Nicholson has always fulfilled for men. Free of the burden of ever having been America's sweetheart, she is the one who represents us [women] in our revenge fantasies ..."
He agreed that, with her "schticky as near dominatrix" over partner Sonny Bono and her stage costumes, she led the way to advance feminine rebellion in the rock world, with contemporaries Marianne Faithfull and Nancy Sinatra being her followers.
  • "Self-actualization": Cher's "integrity" and "perseverance" were highlighted in the Reaching Your Goals book series of illustrated inspirational readers for children, in which her life was detailed emphasizing the importance of self-actualization
Throughout her career Cher has repeatedly reinvented herself through a series of "whole new" personas, for which she was called "the ultimate pop chameleon" by professor Richard Aquila from Ball State University.
Phill Marder from Goldmine wrote that "[f]rom top to bottom, Cher was the prototype of the female rock star, setting the standard for appearance, from her early hippie days to her later outlandish outfits, and her attitude—the perfect female punk long before punk even was a rock term."
Biographer Mark Bego wrote, "Just when you think that she has done it all, Cher recreates herself and takes on a whole new persona."
  • "Self-actualization" and "female autonomy" are the main keys of her influence and legacy. I tried to do a resume of it to put on the lead, but I assume this passage can be vague because paraphrasing is not my strong suit. Lordelliott (talk) 17:49, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Vague excess? - "she is known for her distinctive contralto singing voice and for having worked in various areas of entertainment, as well as for continuously reinventing both her music and image, the latter of which has caused controversy." I would recommend a full-stop after "music and image" and I would trim out "the latter of which has caused controversy" as excess detail for the lead.
  • Prose. - "which popularized a peculiar "smooth, warm" sound that competed successfully with". Do yo mean "peculiar" or "particular"? Also, ideally you should paraphrase the "smooth, warm" quote to avoid the quote marks and the cite in the lead if at all possible, also, its not in quotes in the article body, so is this already a paraphrase that does not need quote marks?
  • Clarify. - "After the duo's success declined due to the rise of the drug culture". I'm pretty sure I know what you mean here; however, the lead also states: "[they] competed successfully with the predominant British Invasion and Motown Sound of the era." This is likely an important point that needs further explication. Also, "she re-emerged in the 1970s" implies she had at some point disappeared for a period, though this is not previously mentioned in the lead except that the "drug culture" affected her popularity in a vague way. Did she become reclusive or go into hiding, or just loose popularity for a spell?
  • What do you think of: "After the duo's monogamous, drug-free lifestyle had lost its appeal to American youth due to the rise of the drug culture"?
She loose popularity but kept working all the time. What do you suggest here? Lordelliott (talk) 22:18, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, anything that makes it clearer that though she perhaps lost some popularity, she continued to work, versus taking a respite, which is what is currently being implied. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 22:33, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done: After the duo's monogamous, drug-free lifestyle had lost its appeal to American youth due to the rise of the drug culture, she returned to stardom in the 1970s as a television personality with her shows The Sonny & Cher Comedy Hour and Cher, which attained immense popularity; Lordelliott (talk) 22:50, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Clarify. - "At the same time, she established herself as a solo artist". Does this mean Sonny and Cher broke up circa 1970? I see the lead also states: "After Cher and Sonny separated in 1975". I assume this refers to their romantic relationship versus their shared music career.
  • "At the same time" refers to her career with Sonny since 1965. Cher began her solo career at the same time of Sonny & Cher's career. Sonny & Cher's career continued until they separated both romantic and professionally in 1975. It is not clear because I could'nt think of a better paraphrase. Can you help me with that? Lordelliott (talk) 22:18, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. I'll take a look. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 22:33, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
On the lead, Cher and Sonny's divorce is mentioned, but it is not clear that they were married before that. What do you think of "Cher came to prominence in 1965 as one-half of the folk rock husband-and-wife duo Sonny & Cher"? Lordelliott (talk) 23:09, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good point, sounds like a fine solution to me. Nice work BTW! GabeMc (talk|contribs) 23:12, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks man! Lordelliott (talk) 23:22, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Right, well therein lies the apparent contradiction. "Monogamous and drug-free" does not really speak to 1960s counterculture. Why did the article previously point to the rising drug culture as a reason for S&C's fading popularity? Any thoughts? GabeMc (talk|contribs) 00:18, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think the drug culture is a "subculture" of the counterculture of 1960s. Sonny and Cher were labelled as "the first hippies" when they started, and the hippie culture was also part of the counterculture of 1960s. Lordelliott (talk) 00:25, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm with you, and I think your clarification deals with this issue nicely, vis-a-vis drug use, yet we are still linking to the 1960s counterculture. Still, if S&C were indeed among the first hippies, then why/how did the rising drug culture negatively affect their popularity? This isn't necessarily a point that needs explicating in detail in the lead, so long as its sufficiently covered in the article body we are fine, but I find it a bit confusing so I wanted to make sure this point is not convoluted. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 00:33, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think it was because one subculture eclipsed other. As an example, in the mid-1970s punk rock and disco were "rival" genres, even though they were both part of the counterculture. Lordelliott (talk) 00:40, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Also, Sonny and Cher were embraced as part of the counterculture until they made an anti-drug PSA on television. Should it be mentioned on the article? Lordelliott (talk) 00:49, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, if the PSA was a significant factor in their popularity loss, and it can be properly sourced as such then that's exactly what we need so this point is made more clear. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 00:58, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it was a major factor, but only one from a series of events that resulted in them being kicked off the pop stardom. BTW, some new info was added:
As the 1960s came to a close, Sonny and Cher had fallen off the charts. According to biographer Connie Berman, "the heavy, loud sound of groups like Jefferson Airplane and Cream made the folk-rock music of Sonny and Cher seem too bland."[42] Cher later commented, "I loved the new sound of Led Zeppelin, Eric Clapton, the electric-guitar oriented bands. Left to myself, I would have changed with the times because the music really turned me on. But Son[ny] didn't like it—and that was that."[43] Their monogamous, anti-drug lifestyle had also lost its popular appeal among American youths during the period of the sexual revolution and the rise of the drug culture.[44][45] According to biographer Mark Bego, "in spite of their revolutionary unisex clothes, Sonny and Cher were quite 'square' when it came to sex and drugs."[45]
Is this passage still confusing? Lordelliott (talk) 03:43, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The passage is no longer confusing, nice addition. That's excellent work and exactly what needed to be explicated. Well done! GabeMc (talk|contribs) 03:46, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Lordelliott (talk) 04:08, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Awkward. "which popularized a particular smooth sound that successfully competed" Try "which helped to popularize a particularly smooth sound", unless of course this is changing the verifiable meaning. Did their sound sole-handedley popularise a music that competed with the BI and the MTS or did they contribute to a music form that achieved this?
According to the source, their particular sound became "in", and they competed with BI and the MTS. Again, I couldn't think of a better paraphrase. Lordelliott (talk) 04:21, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Then I would tend to word it in the general way, as I suggested above, again, only if this isn't changing the meaning, which it doesn't sound to me like it would be. S&C were one act of many that successfully competed with the BI and the MTS, they are surely not they only ones who did so. Does the source credit them as being the leaders of this successful competition? GabeMc (talk|contribs) 04:31, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The particular smooth sound is credited solely to them, but they are not credited as the leaders of the competition. Lordelliott (talk) 04:35, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Then this point seems resolved to me, though as I said before, it may well come-up at FAC; you can clearly defend the point if it does and it's well sourced in the article so you should be okay, but FAC can be a finicky place. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 04:45, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rephrase/trim puffery. - "'Believe', which revolutionized the recording industry because of its pioneering use of Auto-Tune (also known as the "Cher effect")." I would drop "which revolutionized the recording industry because of its" and the brackets around "Cher effect" and go with: "'Believe', which featured the pioneering use of Auto-Tune, also known as the 'Cher effect'."
  • "At the same time, she established herself as a "serious rock and roller" by releasing platinum-winning rock albums and hit singles such as "I Found Someone", "If I Could Turn Back Time", and "The Shoop Shoop Song (It's in His Kiss)".[3]" 1) "platinum-winning" is not the best choice of words. Platinum album, or platinum single, maybe platinum-earning if you really like the prose, but I suggest you go with "releasing the platinum albums/singles" or simliar. 2) It currently reads: "releasing platinum-winning rock albums and hit singles" but only mentions singles. So decide if you want to swap out one of the covers for her best-selling rock album of that era or remove "rock albums" text-string.
  • Specified: At the same time, she established herself as a "serious rock and roller" by releasing platinum albums such as Heart of Stone (1989) and hit singles such as "I Found Someone" and "If I Could Turn Back Time". Lordelliott (talk) 05:00, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Vague. - "Throughout the 2000s, she embarked on highly successful concert tours." How many? Several, or just two? Did the tours win any sales awards, or were they "highly successful" in terms of sales and/or ticket sales.
  • Now it reads: In the 2000s, she embarked on the highly successful Living Proof: The Farewell Tour and signed a $60 million per-year deal to headline the Colosseum at Caesars Palace in Las Vegas. Farewell Tour's success is resourced on the 2000s subsection. Better? Lordelliott (talk) 05:00, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Trim non-notable excess. - "Her other ventures have included: fashion designing, endorsing products, writing books, starring in fitness videos, and managing film production company Isis." I would drop "endorsing products" and "starring in fitness videos" as not notable enough for inclusion in the lead.
  • You might want to add a cite to the lead for the "Cher effect", just to be safe.
  • Overall, the lead looks pretty tight to me at this point. As I said above, I predict you might have some trouble with "sense of female autonomy and self-actualization", but as I said, I'm with you; others may not agree. I'll keep an eye on it throughout the PR for any changes. Again, nice work on an extremely important subject. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 07:10, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks, man! Looking forward to work with you on the rest of the article.
As for "and managing the film production company, Isis", I think "a film production company" would sound better. Am I right? Lordelliott (talk) 07:31, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
TMK, because we are identifing a specific noun, we should then use the definite article. If you left out "Isis", then "a" (an indefinite article) would be more appropriate to indicate that a generic/non-specific noun was to follow. However, I do not claim to be a master grammarian and I may be wrong on this particular point. User:Rothorpe would be a very good person to ask if you want a second opinion. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 07:38, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Early life
[edit]
  • Did she start going by only "Cher" during her early life, or is that coming up in later the article? If so, where?
  • Phil Spector chose to release her first single under the name "Bonnie Jo Mason" because he felt "Cherilyn" and "Cher" were un-American. Her second single was released under the name "Cherilyn" to erase the failure that her first single had been. Are these reasons notable? Lordelliott (talk) 17:43, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do the sources provide any detail as to the extent of her Cherokee ancestry? It would be a nice point to expand a bit if possible.
  • Clarify. - "Cher's family noticed her creativity". Is this the first time they noticed, or one of several. If this is the earliest known artistic expression which her family noticed, and is sourced that way, I would amend to: "Cher's family first noticed her creativity ..."
  • Awkward/clarify. - "Cher was fascinated by movie stars, with her role model being Audrey Hepburn in the 1961 film Breakfast at Tiffany's." Was Hepburn Cher's role-model, or was Hepburn's role/character in the film Cher's role-model? Try: "Fascinated by movie stars, Cher's role model was Audrey Hepburn, particularly after (or was it because of?) her role in the 1961 film, Breakfast at Tiffany's", or similar.
  • Improve detail. - Per: "Holt secured her daughters acting parts as extras in television shows such as The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet.[8]" It would be nice if you could add at least one other TV show in which Holt's daughters were extras. If not, consider a re-phrase to: "Holt secured her daughters acting parts as extras on the television show, The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet.[8]"
  • Clarify. - "Despite not being an excellent student, Cher was intelligent and creative, according to Berman." Surely Berman didn't personally know Cher during these years, right? Did Berman say that Cher's teachers thought that she was intelligent and creative?
  • Hmmm ... does Berman's surrounding text indicate how he came to this conclusion? It seems to me that he is merely repeating something he read or heard from somone in a position to know this. I wouldn't remove it just yet, its a good datum, but I would like it to be linked to an opinion other than just Cher's biographer. It's okay to say, "according to Berman, Cher's teachers said she was ...", as long as the source supports this and it's not a WP:SYNTH or WP:OR. Perhaps this is merely an opinion synthesised by Berman, in which case it should likely be removed. Though, as I said, its a good datum that is almost certainly factually accurate, so lets retain it if possible. What are your thoughts? GabeMc (talk|contribs) 21:35, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Berman himself called Cher "intelligent and creative" during this time. The sources reads: In classes, Cher was not a top student. She did well in French and English, however, and she was intelligent and creative. She usually got good grades on term papers and essays. Lordelliott (talk) 04:14, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tense. - "As an adult, she would discover that she suffered from dyslexia." If she continues to suffer with dyslexia, I would word it similar to: "As an adult, she discovered that she suffers from dyslexia", if the issue was isolated to her youth only, I would use the perfect past tense as such: "As an adult, she discovered that she had suffered from dyslexia as a youth."
1960s
[edit]
  • Header clarity. - "Sonny and the rise and fall from pop stardom" seems a bit awkward to me. Try: "Sonny and Cher's rise and fall from pop stardom" or similar (assuming its an accurate title for the section).
  • Clarify. - "She danced in small clubs along Hollywood's Sunset Strip, introducing herself to performers, managers, and agents.[15]" The word "club" is currently linked to nightclub, which carries an entirely different connotation than does strip club. Do the reliable sources support that Cher was "dancing" in nightclubs or "stripping" in strip clubs?
  • The source says exactly: Sometimes she danced in small clubs along Hollywood’s famed Sunset Strip. While most of the town was fast asleep, young Cher was dancing her heart out in the wee hours of the morning. Lordelliott (talk) 04:10, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Establishing specific authors. - "According to biographer Connie Berman, "[Cher] did not hesitate". Since Berman is now previously mentioned by name in "Early life" the "According to biographer Connie Berman" is either excessive or misplaced. Introduce Berman at the article's first opportunity, then refer to him as just Berman afterward (I realise this issue was created by the in-line attribution of the "intelligent and creative" datum to Berman, so depending where you decide to go with that issue, this may be fine here).
  • I am still waiting for your response to decide where to go with the "intelligent and creative" issue. But one user on the FAC wrote that biographers and similar should be always refered to with full name, unless the second mention is very close to the first. What do you think about that? Lordelliott (talk) 04:22, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think we should retain the "intelligent and creative" datum as an important point about her as a young adult. Refer to an author using their full name on the first mention, then only if it's been a while since, but definately not on every instance, that is certainly wrong. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 04:37, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Clarify/improve prose. - "Sonny brought Cher to Spector". Would it be equally as accurate to say rather, "Sonny introduced Cher to Spector"?
  • Clarify. - "Cher and Sonny ... performed their own wedding ceremony in a hotel room in Tijuana, Mexico". Does Mexico allow non-judges and/or non-clergy to marry people? Was this "self-performed" ceremony legally binding or merely symbolic?
  • According to one source (which is not used on the article), Late in 1964 Cher and Sonny became romantic partners. Recognizing that they were really in love, the couple performed their own wedding ceremony in a hotel room in Tijuana, Mexico, exchanging rings and vowing eternal love. Although they told people they were married, the ceremony was hardly official. It seems that the ceremony was merely symbolic. Should this passage be reworded? Lordelliott (talk) 04:22, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think the material currently in the article body is sufficient in this regard. Further explication would be more appropriate at Sonny & Cher. Alternatively you could consider adding a "notes" section in which to add more detail for the reader without expanding an already long article. A "notes" section would also prove extremely helpful after we finish with the prose and move on to some trimming. Notes are a great way to retain (or add) useful information while allowing the article to properly summarise the subject without being overly detailed. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 01:53, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Chronology. - "In 1964, they emerged as a duo" comes after "[they were married] in October 1964". Did they emerge post-October 1964, or is this datum a bit out of chronological order?
  • Linking. - "and released the singles "The Letter", "Do You Wanna Dance" and "Love Is Strange". Wikilink these songs where possible for consistency (on first mention in the lead and first mention in article body).
  • Accuracy check. - "Look at Us, which spent five weeks at number two on the Billboard 200". Did the album spend five weeks in toto on the chart, or five weeks at number two?
  • Clarify. - "After Sonny & Cher's smooth sound and warm harmonies became popular, the duo successfully competed with the British Invasion of the Beatles and the Motown Sound of the Supremes." I assume one could correctly insert "in America" after "became popular", or no? Does the source support this clarification?
  • In fact, they were popular first in the UK, then in America. They travelled to London at the Rolling Stones' advice (band members said their weird clothes would be better received in the UK), then the hotel incident happened and they were propelled to stardom. Back to America, they became a sensation mostly because people thought they were part of the British Invasion. Lordelliott (talk) 06:09, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I do. Adding some of this material may help fill-in a few holes in the chronology. However, having said that, I assume this is covered at the S&C article in detail, so if you do add it here, keep the brevity of this article and redundancy with the other in mind. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 23:05, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The section looks pretty tight overall in my opinion. I'll take another look tonight for gaps, but otherwise I think we can move on to the 70s, if and when we feel that all the above and below issues have been resolved. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 02:13, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • When? - "Following their first trip to London". Be specific about which year this trip took place, such as: "In 196X, following their first trip to London,".
One observation: I noticed you removed "as they became known collectively" after the first mention of "Sonny & Cher". Since they were previously known as "Caesar & Cleo", I think this passage should stay. What do you think? Lordelliott (talk) 04:10, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I find it excessive but if you like it, I don't see any harm in adding it back. One issue (which we will deal with later), is that the article is about 3,000 words too long, so we need to trim where we can and farm the details out to sub-articles where possible, but as I said, don't worry about the article's length too much right now. At least until we finish tightening up the existing prose and decide what should stay and what should go. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 04:37, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I surely agree with you. I think a casual reader would be confused when the article initially refers to the duo as Caesar & Cleo, then as Sonny & Cher without explanation. Lordelliott (talk) 06:09, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"as they became known collectively" is an awkward way to say that at X point in time they became known as "S&C". Feel free to leave it in of course, but I do predict that it will be an issue at FAC, though admittedly a minor one. If you think the reader will be confused, then just tell the reader when the name change occured. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 04:32, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What would you suggest? Lordelliott (talk) 22:16, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How about: "By Somethingember, 196X, Caesar & Cleo had begun calling themselves Sonny & Cher. Signed to the Atco Records division of Atlantic Records in (insert month) 1965, they released their first album, Look at Us, in month. It spent five weeks at number two on the Billboard 200." Or similar. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 23:15, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Awkward prose/clarify. - "and Sonny came along as producer". How and why? Was he signed to produce Cher by Liberty? Was Cher allowed to pick her own producer that early in her music career? If so, why?
  • Prose. - "Suspecting they were onto something". This needs tightening. Try: "Encouraged by the song's ("Dream Baby") regional success", or similar.
  • Prose. - "and become rock's 'it' couple" sounds like its either a close paraphrase or a bit fancrufty, though I can certainly appreciate its cultural accuracy, it stirikes me as a bit unencyclopedic. Try an alternate wording that avoids this issue while still conveying the intended meaning of the original source.
  • This is a tough one. While most editors will certainly know what an "it" couple is, I think it may be a bone of contention at FAC, in terms of prose. One solution would be to include the statement inside a quote, so as to avoid using Wikipedia's voice to say it. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 01:44, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cite needed. - "they became a phenomenon that resembled Beatlemania." Cite this so as to avoid suspicions of WP:OR or WP:SYNTH.
  • Prose. - "and went on tour at the biggest U.S. arenas.[34]" Try: "and completed a tour of some of the largest arenas in the US". Also, while U.S. and US are both acceptable, I prefer US, as terminal punctuation in running prose can be awkward and jarring. That's just my personal opinion, either is fine.
  • Clumsy/obvious explication. - "Their shows were notably attended by Cher look-alikes". If the material wasn't notable, then it wouldn't be included. Try: "Their shows were often attended by", "Their shows were attended by" or "Their shows were sometimes attended by" or similar, while maintaining accuracy with the cited source.
  • Prose. "designing a line of marketed wardrobe". Would "designing a line of women's clothing" be as accurate to the source? If so, consider re-wording it similarly. If she designed both women's and men's clothing, try: "designing a line of clothing for both woman and men", or similar.
  • Cite needed. - "became her first solo million-seller."
  • In-line attribution needed. - "included songs described as "little soap-opera stories set to rock music". Per the Wikipedia MoS, you must attribute direct quotes in-line whenever it is unclear who is being quoted.
  • Prose. - "As the 1960s came to a close, Sonny and Cher had fallen off the charts." They didn't fall off a chart, but their music may have failed to chart. Try: "By the end of the 1960s, Sonny and Cher's music had ceased to chart", or similar.
  • Clarity. - "In 1969, she was dropped from Imperial Records because of the political problems her solo career had created for Sonny and Cher at Atco." What political problems? I find this a bit nebulous.
  • That leads me to a new question: one source (Allmusic) says that Cher's solo career at Imperial ended with the lapsing of her contract in 1967 (even though she released two albums for Imperial in 1968); however, Mark Bego's biography says that she was dropped from the label in 1969. What should I do? Lordelliott (talk) 18:01, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, IMO, if Cher released two albums for Imperial in 1968, then her career with them didn't really end in 1967 as allmusic states. Perhaps her contract lapsed and was not renewed but she still "owed" Imperial two albums? In which case allmusic isn't entirely incorrect, in that she no longer "worked" for Imperial despite the two forthcoming releases (were they also recorded in 1968 or just released in 1968?). Can you find a third or fourth source to compare to allmusic and Bego's dates? GabeMc (talk|contribs) 21:29, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've made some research and I found nothing but unreliable sources. The sources I found state that she left the label in 1969, and the album Backstage, released for Imperial in 1968, was also recorded in 1968. It seems that the Allmusic source is wrong. Since the "political problems" are resourced by Allmusic, should it be removed? Lordelliott (talk) 21:50, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • In-line attribution needed. - "it was later proclaimed 'the finest album of her career'."[according to whom?]
  • Clarify. - "Sonny prevented Cher from recording more albums for Atco until the contract ended". "until the contract ended" is a bit confusing. Did she ever make another record for Atco? If not, trim out "until the contract ended".
  • Clarify. - "The art film failed, costing the duo a good portion of their savings." Do the sources say how much?
  • I've not added it to the article yet, take a look: That same year, the duo spent $500,000 and mortgaged their home to make the film Chastity. Written and directed by Sonny, who did not appear in the movie, it told the story of a young woman, played by Cher, searching for the meaning of life.[36] The art film failed, putting the couple $190,000 in debt with back taxes. However, some critics noted that Cher showed signs of acting potential.[37] - Is that right? Lordelliott (talk) 18:21, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Prose. - "Cher demonstrated traces of good instinctive acting" Try: "Cher showed signs of acting potential", or similar.


1970s
[edit]
  • Clarity/detail. - "Cher honed her acting skills in sketch comedy roles such as ... and a slew of historical vamps". Maybe provide an example or two after: "and a slew of historical vamps", i.e. "including A, B and C".
  • Prose. - "The high-fashion clothes Cher wore on the show ..." Could this be re-worded to read: "The designer clothing Cher wore on the show ...", while still retaining the meaning of the original source?
  • Clarify. - "radio station programmers quickly rejected the song". Why?
  • Passive voice. - "Since Sonny's first attempts at reviving their recording career as a duo had also been unsuccessful, Snuff Garrett was recruited to work with them." Would it be just as accurate to write: "Since Sonny's first attempts at reviving their recording career as a duo had also been unsuccessful, they recruited Snuff Garrett to work with them"?
  • Then how about " ... Kapp Records recruited Snuff Garrett to work with them"?
  • In-line attribution needed. - "a US top-ten single which "solidified the image of a new, more confident and powerful Cher."
  • Clarify/link. - "Garrett quit as producer after disagreeing with Sonny about the kind of material Cher should be recording". Consider linking "kind" with genre, assuming that is accurate to the intended meaning of the original source.
  • I don't think it has to do with the genre, but with the lyrics. Garrett's lyrics were too "trash-pop" for Sonny. It is my own opinion and the source doesn't say that. I'm stating that because I don't really see any difference between the genres of Cher's albums produced by Garrett and Sonny. What do you think? Lordelliott (talk) 00:07, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, I think see what you mean. This is a tough one. As it reads right now it sounds like Garrett wanted to take Cher down a different musical path then did Sonny, yet if the material is nearly indistinguishable, then this needs clarifying. Can you find any sources that explicitly state what it was that Sonny didn't like about Garrett's creative leadership? GabeMc (talk|contribs) 00:29, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not at all. The source on the article only says they disagreed on the kind of material Cher should be recording, nothing more, nothing less. I think Sonny was unhappy simply because he wanted to control every aspect of their careers. Lordelliott (talk) 07:40, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would advise you to keep digging. Ideally, you would find a quote from Sonny explicating his creative differences with Garrett. Otherwise, it could likely be left as it is, though I think others may find this datum lacking explaination, but maybe not. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 00:36, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Clarify. - "which demonstrated the evolution of her vocal abilities" or "which demonstrated her vocal range". Which descriptor is more accurate to the source, evolution or range?
  • Accuracy check. - Garrett commented, "I said from the lyrics ..." Is this quote accurate? Seems like, "I knew from the lyrics ..." would be much better.
  • Redundancy. - "in 1974, also from the album of the same name.[66] That same year,". Try "later that year" or similar, assuming its accurate.
  • In-line attribution. - "with the latter containing "one of the catchiest choral hooks ever recorded".[according to whom?]
  • In-line attribution. - "which was later regarded as "the worst of either artist's respective career".[70][according to whom?]
  •  Done Under the rubric "Allman and Woman", they released in 1977 a duet album called Two the Hard Way, which was later regarded by History as "the worst of either artist's respective career".[70] Lordelliott (talk) 18:00, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Avoid given name after establishment. - "Encouraged by David Geffen", I noticed in a few spots that you identify him by his full name after he has already been well astablished.
  • Attribution. - "with one critic writing: "Cher is just no rock and roller ... Image".
  • Overuse of given name. "troubled relationship with Gregg Allman" surely at this point a reader will know which Allman. Please take a look through the entire article for this issue, so that we don't need to deal with it throughout.
  • Confusing prose. - "The adverse publicity of Cher's troubled relationship with Gregg Allman and her much-reported high lifestyle added to the pair's put-down humor in the context of a "painful" divorce had created a public backlash that contributed to the failure of the show." I'd offer you more help on thgis one but I don't know the sources or the context well enough to make snese out of this. Specifically, what's a "high lifestyle" and what does "added to the pair's put-down humor" mean?
  • "High lifestyle" means crazy, controversial lifestyle. As for "put-down humor", S&C's TV return went on air one hour later than S&C Comedy Hour; this allowed them to make "dirtier" jokes about themselves and the fact that they were still together on TV despite all the court battles they were involved. The public went confused, and the show flopped. Lordelliott (talk) 18:00, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
1980s
[edit]
  • Clarity. - "In 1980, Cher co-wrote with Giorgio Moroder her last Casablanca disco recording". Does the article previously mention "Casablanca"? Which I assume is a record label, if it does, I missed it.
  • Vague. - "Before long, Black Rose broke up;" When? Days, months, weeks?
  • Vague/clarify. - "Cher became a successful nightclub personality". Was she singing and making jokes? This sounds like she was a comedian only.
  • Attribution. - "later described as "one of the more inspired rock duets of the 1980's".[according to whom?]
  • Attribution. - "Cher's "strongest and most consistent solo album in years"[according to whom?]
  • Prose. - "With album sales and hit singles again at a standstill, Cher decided to expand her career into serious film acting" Try: "With decreasing album sales and a lack of hit singles, Cher decided to further develop her acting career", or similar.
  • Prose. - "offered her the part (at $150,000) of Meryl Streep's" I suggest working the salary into the prose versus leaving it as a parenthetical, where its a bit awkward.
  • Is the $150,000 figure especially notable? Was it an above average salary at the time for a female actor? If not, I would consider trimming it out as an awkward datum that does not seem to add much, unless, as I said above, the figure is notable and not trivial. E.g., we don't mention her TV show salaries. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 00:20, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think it is notable for being the opposite of an average salary. The $150,000 salary she received for this film was half the salary she earned weekly in Vegas. I think it shows how "underappreciated" she was in Hollywood at the time. What do you think? Lordelliott (talk) 01:24, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Right. Then I think you should make that clear by adding something about how the salary was relatively low. With inflation and everything else, a reader might not make the connection that the salary wasn't the "going price" for a respected actress. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 22:18, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thinking again, the article already says the audiences were skeptical about Cher's ability as an actress when she starred in Silkwood, so I think it's fine to remove the $150,000 figure. Do you agree? Lordelliott (talk) 22:33, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Clarify. - "a lover (Sam Elliott) and is coping with her teenaged son (Eric Stoltz)," Elliot wasn't her lover, he played her lover. Same with Stoltz playing her son.
  • Clarify. - "who suffers from a severe head deformity". Is the condition mentioned by name in the sources?
  • Awkward atribution. - "According to the book Hollywood Songsters: Allyson to Funicello". We wouldn't say according to a book, try: "according to authors James Parish and Michael Pitts" or similar.
  • Source check. - "To show her scorn for the 'system'" Is "system" in quotes in the original source?
  • Vocab. - "The audience 'roared'". Find a better word then "roared" that conveys the same sentiment.
  • Clarify. - "commercials as from her still-controversial lifestyle" Have we properly established what exactly was controversial about her lifestyle?
  • Not exactly. The 1970s subsection says that her style of living was "extravagant". I think it was because she went to parties and dated men half her age, despite being in her 40s and having two children. Should the "controversial lifestyle" bit be specified or deleted? Lordelliott (talk) 23:21, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • My instinct would be to specify versus deleting, assuming its notable enough for inclusion (it seems to be). The choice has to do with your editorial discretion based on your knowledge of the sources. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 00:17, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, we don't want to repeat info later explicated, but on the other hand, this shouldn't be a datum that is confusing until the reader gets to the "Public Image" subsection. I don't think much detail is needed in that regard, but perhaps a bit might improve the article's clarity. You could perhaps move a datum from "Public Image" to earlier in the article, so as to avoid redundancy. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 22:22, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • What do you think of this? Now receiving as much attention from her Jack LaLanne Health Clubs commercials as from her still-controversial lifestyle, specifically her tattoos, her reported plastic surgeries, her exhibionist fashion sense, and her romances with younger men, ... Lordelliott (talk) 22:36, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Prose. - "helped and romanced by one of the jurors (Dennis Quaid)" Again, Quaid played a juror, but Quaid didn't romance Cher. There are several instances of this issue in this section. Please scan it over for others I havn't listed here.
  • Accuracy/detail. - "one of the three divorcees involved with a rich visitor from hell" Does the source say that Jack Nicholson played the Devil himself, or just a "visitor from hell".
All  Done (except where noted). Lordelliott (talk) 23:21, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Clarify. - "She also won the Golden Globe Award for Best Actress in a Musical or Comedy". Iassume this was for Moonstruck, but it's not clear.
  • Attribution. - "her most impressive string of hits to date."[according to whom?]
  • Attribution. - "serious rock and roller ... a crown that she'd worked long and hard to capture".[according to whom?]
  • One-sentence paragraphs. - "In 1988, Cher released her own fragrance, Uninhibited, which earned about $15 million in its first year sales, and an exercise book called Forever Fit, which sold about 100,000 copies in 1988." Avoid this.
  • Well, just because it throws me a bit does not mean its wrong per se. Sounds like a cross between a lounge singer and a comedian. Is there an appropriate Wikilink that could be used for explication?
  • When I say she makes jokes on her shows, I mean she jokes when she talks to her public, and I think other musicians talk to their public in their shows between the songs too. I don't mean she jokes as a part of the show, like Bette Midler. Hope I'm being clear. Lordelliott (talk) 03:49, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I understand you, I'm just not sure its all that clear what is meant in the article. I would suggest trimming out the joking parts and just call her a singer, given her history of comedy I think its confusing. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 04:03, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The 80s' subsection looks pretty good to me overall, other than a few minor prose issues. Do you want to move on to the 90s' now or are there unresolved issues from previous subsections that still need resolving? GabeMc (talk|contribs) 04:09, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maybe its just me, but it sounds more like a song and joke routine, as with her previous TV shows, but according to you it was more like she was a singer who occasionally interacted with her audience (as most do), sometimes in a joking manner (as many do), which is quite different IMO. Leave it if you are uncertain, if it's a real issue others will also bring it up; but I say if she was a singer, then identify her as such and don't confuse the reader into thinking she was an "act" that included skits or jokes in anyway other than any given performer might. Just my opinion, seek others and don't rely to heavily on any one person's interpretation. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 04:24, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
1990s
[edit]
  • Vague. - "and reached top five worldwide".
  • Vocabulary. - "and spawned four hit singles", try: "and produced four hit singles" or similar.
  • Notes. - "In Germany, Cher received the Echo Award for international female artist." This is a good example of a datum that should be retained, yet adds little to the running prose. It would make a good note.
  • Clarify. - "That year, the European compilation album Cher's Greatest Hits: 1965-1992". I assume the compliation album doesn't have a continental ethnicity. Try, "That year, the compilation album Cher's Greatest Hits: 1965-1992".
  • Prose. - "Cher fell victim of Epstein-Barr virus", try: "Cher contracted the Epstein-Barr virus"
  • Bare url. - Cite #43 needs tidying, though I suggest the datum that it verifies could likely be removed as excess or moved to a "notes" section. If you are unsure how to start a "notes" section, I would be happy to show you.
  • Prose. - "which came out of her conceit of covering men's songs", I think you mean, "inspired by her frustration of covering men's songs", or similar.
  • Feel free to use whatever word you want, but I predict that others will also tell you that "conceit" is not the correct words to use in this case. I think you mean to say "contempt", but that still seems awkward to me. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 23:26, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lets not get too hung up on this one point. I suggested "frustation" or "resentment" based on how I read the context. I don't think "concept" is any better, if anything, it's further from clarity then conceit. Perhaps you should ask for another opinion on this point, or just wait until others give more helpful suggestions in this regard. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 23:56, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Clarify. - "which drew the highest ratings ever for an original TV movie on HBO" To that point or since?
  • Excess. - "Following the death of now US Congressman and former husband Sonny Bono", trim out "now US Congressman and former husband" as excess and redundant detail.
  • Attribution. - "Cher delivered a 'deeply moving' eulogy at his funeral", lose the "ghost Quotes" around "deeply moving" as unneeded. Parahrase it if possible, but the phrase isn't really creative enough to be overy concerned about plagarism. Perhaps just drop, "deeply".
  • Attribution, prose. - "Cher paid tribute to Bono by hosting the "affectionate" CBS special Sonny & Me", either drop the quotes and use a synonym or just drop the quotes as unneeded.
  • Attribution. - "which was praised by critics for revealing the singer to be 'down to earth' and 'genuine'." Same as above, drop the quotes or attribute in-line.~
  • Prose. - "Cher told Rolling Stone later," try: "Cher later told Rolling Stone".
  • Confusing. - "Cher's twenty-third studio album Believe (1998) marked a musical departure for her, as it was a collection of dance-pop songs.[3] Several tracks on the album captured the "disco-era essence". Why was Believe a "musical departure"? Cher had already establisheed herself as a pop and dance deva no?
  • Material location. - "With "Believe", Cher became the oldest female artist (at the age of 52) to top the Billboard Hot 100.[165] It also gave her the distinction of having the longest span of number-one singles (33 years) and the longest gap between number-one singles (ten days short of 25 years) in the rock era of the Hot 100.[166] Cher is also the only woman to have a US top-ten single in every decade from the 1960s to the 1990s.[167]" While we are certainly discussing the album in the section, I con't help but feel that some of this detail should be in the "Legacy" section.
  • Move excess detail to notes. This is an excellent candidate for a "note": "The album Believe also produced a worldwide top-ten single, "Strong Enough".[168]"
  • Attribution. - "with Cher's presence being "a huge part of making it exactly that."[170][according to whom?]
  • Prose. - "with a global audience of over 1.5 million.[167][171]" Try: "amassing a global audience of more than 1.5 million.[167][171]", or similar.
2000s
[edit]
2010s
  • This section looks pretty good to me. I have no comments on it at this point. Let me know when you feel that the above issues have been properly resolved and we can move on to the rest of the article. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 23:59, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Artistry
Music and voice
[edit]
  • Attribution. - "which was described as 'bold, deep, and with a spacious vibrato.'" Please go through the rest of the article and scan for these unattributed quotes.
  • Clarity. - "were songs composed by independent songwriters, selected by Cher" Were the songs or the songwriters selected by Cher?
  • Attribution. - "in order to 'remain relevant and do work that strikes a chord.'"[according to whom?]
  • Attribution. - "Instead of sticking to a catalog that 'includes some of the most indelible pop anthems of all time', she 'has kept [her] musical inclinations sounding fresh and vital when many of her contemporaries falter' through '[a] unique blend of panache and tenacity'.[3]"
  • Accuracy check. - "revealing psychologically" or "psychologically revealing"?
  • Prose. - "In the 1960s and early 1970s", try: "During the 1960s and early 1970s".
  • Attribution. - "She has been praised for her ability to meld the 'tremendous intensity and passion' of her vocal performance".
  • Prose. - "Cher's music broached difficult areas" Do you mean "controversial areas"?
  • Paraphrase or attribute in-line. - "Cher's 1960s work was 'expressive and radiant'".
  • Confusing. - "Despite having 'a relatively narrow singing range' at the time" is closely followed by "because of her ability to carry both male and female ranges", which would seem to imply a wider singing range then most.
  • Attribution. - "Cher incorporated the 'loud, rhythmic, danceable' beats of disco music". Please scan through the rest of this section and the article for unattributed quotes.
  • Excess detail. - "The songs 'Take Me Home' and 'Hell on Wheels' were later described as 'timeless dance anthems'.[3]" Either trim this out or move it to notes.
  • Attribution. - "and an 'ass-kicking attitude' in her vocals"
  • Prose. - "resonant keyboard blasts", this is awkward, rephrase.
  • Paraphrase or attribute. - "Cher's 'determined and chipper' vocals" and "Cher chose "steamy, torchy' ballads".
  • Same. - "revealing 'vibrant and previously unheard colors of her voice', as well as a 'surprisingly soulful falsetto' in the song", "having 'revolutionized record-making.'[4][230]".
  • I will reply and work on your comments soon, because now I am working on the cite bundling. I'm pretty sure that there are some errors on the descriptions of the refs. Would you mind reviewing it? Thanks. Lordelliott (talk) 18:28, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Don't you think the following sentences would make great notes?
  • In 1980, alongside Italian record producer Giorgio Moroder, Cher wrote her last Casablanca disco recording, "Bad Love", for the film Foxes.
  • On December 24, 1995, Cher starred in the ITV special Christmas with Cher. Lordelliott (talk) 20:59, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes I do. Glad to see you identifing some potential excess, as moving these and similar datums to notes will be a good first approach to trimming the article down to an acceptable "readable prose" size. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 00:13, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks, Gabe. User Wikipedian Penguin said he thinks the sentences are reasonably noteworthy and can stay in the prose: I think "Bad Love" and the Christmas special can say however because they're different: one is her last Casablanca disco song, and the other is a Christmas special, which she hasn't done before. Thinking again, I agree with him. What do you think? Lordelliott (talk) 04:43, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, its up to you of course, but I can tell you with near certainty that this article will not pass FAC at its current length of 75 kB and 12,8000 words of readable prose. Your goal should be around 50 kB and 9,000 words, meaning nearly 4,000 words of readable prose will either need to be trimmed from the article or moved to notes. This is about picking the most notable aspects of her career to fill the limited space and to me at least, these two datums seem less then crucial. Also, I'm really not interested in running a three person PR whereby I need to respond to the other PR's comments as well as yours. Perhaps you should pick one and finish it before starting another. I would be happy to continue this PR, but I do not have the time to workshop this article with a third-party. Let me know what you prefer to do; if you would rather abandon this PR and go with the WPPenguin PR I will not take it personally. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 21:49, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry, I don't want you to respond to the other PR's comments. In this case I just wanted to reach a consensus. Of course I want your PR to continue. I think we can work on trimming the text after we finish the prose. Thanks! Lordelliott (talk) 21:56, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I was wondering if the following quotation could be paraphrased and worked into the prose: Cher later commented about her schedule during this period: I could do a whole album with Snuffy [Garrett] in three days. I'd sing each song through two or three times and, if you got it, it was on to the next one ... We were on the road, I was recording, and we were doing the Sonny & Cher Show, all at the same time! I was fried! I did the best that I could [fitting] each obligation into what little time was alotted. If so, can you help me with that? Lordelliott (talk) 21:58, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've trimmed the quote to avoid the exclamation points and redundancy. Feel free to revert if you disagree with what I've done. If you want a full paraphrase you could try: "During this period, Cher stayed busy recording, touring, and working on the Sonny & Cher Show", or similar. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 22:21, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looks great. Could you do the same with this quote? Last year I started listening to everything I could get my hands on—Stevie Wonder, Elton John, James Taylor and Carly Simon, Joni Mitchell, Bob Dylan, everybody. By listening and singing along I started developing things that I didn't have. I certainly got the instrument to work with. "Gypsys, Tramps and Thieves" and all those songs are million-selling songs. But they are ridiculous because artistically they aren't fulfilling. Money-wise, they're great, but I would like to spend four or five months on an album and do something really fantastic. Thanks! Lordelliott (talk) 22:18, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is no set standard that I am aware of, but decades are a common way to divide material. In terms of this article, I think the division works well, especially considering that the decades do seem to have defined themes, though I haven't really put much thought into alternatives. Do you have an alternate suggestion? GabeMc (talk|contribs) 22:54, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I do agree that the decades have defined themes of her career. My point is that it makes the sections look too long, but if that's not a FAC problem, I think it can stay.
  • I think the following quotation is overlong and would look better worked into the prose: When "I Found Someone" came out, radio just refused to play us. I [then] did as much TV as I possibly could to let people know that the record was out there. I finally had to put the video that we made for it into a commercial for Bally Fitness, and that's how we got it into people's minds. Finally, it just got so much attention, and people started asking for it that radio had to play it. Before that, radio was just not interested. Sometimes, it's amazing to me that I have a recording career at all![3] Could you paraphrase it? Sorry for my successive paraphrasing requests! I'm really bad with that. Lordelliott (talk) 23:03, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think it shows the boycott she received by the radio stations due to her age and explains the considerable failure of her previous musical efforts. I think it also adds to the "sense of female autonomy" presented on the lead. What do you think? Lordelliott (talk) 23:53, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • To me its excess detail about the song and Cher's own opinion. It should be trimmed out, IMO. "Her first top-ten hit in more than eight years.[3]" tells us that her musical career had been waning. I don't see how this helps explicate the "sense of female autonomy". If you disagree then by all means leave it in, but I don't really think that should be paraphrased. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 00:43, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alright. Do you think this quotation could be worked into the prose? "We just chose songs that felt right on an individual basis. It wasn't until we started to assess the entire album and play with sequencing that we realized that this had subconsciously become an album filled with love and warmth. It was a pleasant surprise, and it's certainly an appropriate time to put some positive energy out into the world." —Cher, on the making of Living Proof Lordelliott (talk) 00:56, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, IMO, the article is already a bit quote heavy and some will need to be trimmed out/paraphrased later. Also, this is detail that would seem to be more appropriate at the topical article dedicated to the album. Remember, we cannot cover every aspect of Cher's long and illustrious career at this overview summary style article. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 01:05, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think this could be paraphrased too: Garrett commented, "I said from the lyrics it's a smash for Cher and for nobody else. And I didn't even have Cher at the time. To me, nobody else could do that song but Cher—that was Cher's story. So I held the song and then it worked out that we got Cher back, but the song sat in my desk for about three, four months." Again, sorry for the successive requests. Thanks, Lordelliott (talk) 23:05, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree with you in this case. I just added this because on the FAC they told me it would be good to have some subjective details of her musical career rather than sales and chart positions. Lordelliott (talk) 23:53, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sandwiched text. - In the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s sections there are once again sandwiched text. Don't overload the article with images if you cannot avoid sandwiching text.
  • That's true, a smaller screen will sandwich text between images more than a larger one, but my screen is 20 inches, which I think is pretty standard. At any rate, I think you could spare to lose an image or two, particularly any with dubious FURs. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 22:54, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Movies, music videos and live performances
[edit]
  • Confusing, lacking attribution. - "In her early career, Cher was presented as 'an ideal site for the meaning of others' and as 'a body that could showcase male creativity'; however, she came under her own ownership and control in her later career.[225]" I find this quite nebulous. Consider trimming it out entirely, unless there is an especially important point in there that I am missing which could be better explicated.
  • It means that Cher was not under her own control in her early career. She was a vehicle to showcase male creativity: she would wear Bob Mackie-designed gowns, sing Sonny Bono-penned songs, and do Sonny-scripted routines on TV. However, she managed to control her career as she's got older. I think this is a pretty interesting point of Cher's career, but I do agree that it is nebulous the way it is written now. Maybe a paraphrase would work better? Lordelliott (talk) 18:24, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Accuracy with source. - "not only to forge a career (as an actor) on her own terms". Should those be square brackets indicating an interpolation, or are they round in the OS.
  • Confusing, lacking attribution. - "her status as 'an emancipated and assimilated body' and was ..." What's an "assimilated body"?
  • Trim or explicate. - "and was credited with powerful speeches on behalf of others". This seems to be lacking context. Trim or explicate further.
  • Prose and attribution. - "Mermaids (1990) made use of her 'strong, sexually assertive' image ("A real woman is never too old", her character says).[226]" Either paraphrase or attribute "strong, sexually assertive" and trim out ("A real woman is never too old", her character says) as an excess parenthetical.
  • Attribution. - "in which she 'repeteadly comments on her own construction, on her search for perfection and on the performance of the female body.'[226]"
  • Attribution, dubious claim. - "Cher's 'Hell on Wheels' was one of the first music videos ever[dubious – discuss] and involved "almost as many intricate techniques as a feature film".[according to whom?][228][229]" There had been numerous music vids by 1979 and the one for "Hell on Wheels" is certainly not "one of the first music videos ever".
  • This is according to the source, which says: "Cher starred in one of the very first music videos ever" referring to "Hell on Wheels". I think "almost as many intricate techniques as a feature film" could be paraphrased; help me? Lordelliott (talk) 18:24, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Attribution. - "Cher's live performances were described as 'more of a revue than a concert.'[231]"[according to whom?]
  • Excess detail. - "This model was improved in her later concert tours." Trim out or move to notes.
  • Reduce redundancy. - "The New York Times called her 1999 concert show a 'high-energy circus'.[209] In her 2002 concert show," avoid the redundancy of "concert show", closely followed by "The 'grand show' featured", which should also be re-worded to avoid the unneeded quotes.
  • Brackets. - "fire (projected) and an animal act (a life-sized puppet elephant)".[232]" Should these be round or square?
Filmography
  • Lose the table and treat the material as you have in the "Discography" and "Tours and concerts" sections.
  • 1) "All the other actors' biographies have tables" is WP:OTHERTHINGSEXIST, 2) how many of these are FA and when did they pass FAC? To me, it's all either redundant with the topical article dedicated to her filmography, or not notable enough for inclusion in this article. If the material is also included as running prose in the Cher article, then it's redundant in the table. I would trim out anything she didn't have at least a significant supporting role in, including cameos. If there are significant notable acting achievments detailed in the table that are not currently in the article text, then those datums should be worked into the prose before they are removed from the table. Of course, that's just my opinion, feel free to get a second or third if you disagree. I may well be wrong and it won't come up at FAC, but I think it will. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 06:42, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
To do list


In progress ... more to come. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 00:53, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ Berman 2001, p. 17.
  2. ^ Bego 2004, p. 11.
  3. ^ Cheever, Susan (May 17, 1993). "In a Broken Land". People. Time Warner. Retrieved October 28, 2012.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Cher/archive2&oldid=1086347497"