Talk:Melly Goeslaw

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleMelly Goeslaw has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 27, 2011Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on September 11, 2011.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that one of Indonesia's "most sought-after movie songwriters" started her career by writing about flatulence and sexual deviancy?
On this day...A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on January 7, 2024.

DYK nomination[edit]

References[edit]

Nearly all of the references provided are by a single website. Reanimated X (talk) 06:25, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Jakarta Post is one of the foremost English-language newspapers in Indonesia. Wikipedia referencing standards suggest prioritizing English-language sources, so that means fewer than five newspapers and any English-language writer who has noted her career to work with for English-language sources. Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:55, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You're still not addressing the problem. You ought to use more than a single website as a source of citations, according to the Notability guideline, which is clearly not the case here. Reanimated X (talk) 07:57, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There are five separate articles from the Jakarta Post, two from the Jakarta Globe (a separate newspaper), one from Rolling Stone Indonesia and one from an Indonesian celebrity news site. I fail to see how that is using a "single website". Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:03, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You might be using 4 different sources, but 95% of this article consists of material from only two websites - the Jakarta Post and Globe. I fail to see how that constitutes as "multiple" sources. Reanimated X (talk) 08:07, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hyperbole aside (Article minus lead is less than 7000 chars, RSI alone provides sourcing for 750... clearly more than 5%), winning a national award for songwriting as well as having two songs voted among the best ever by a leading music magazine are more than enough to satisfy WP:N. Regarding the "single source" issue, WP:RS does not define a source as being a single publisher, but a "reliable, published source"; i.e. a printed work. That would mean 7 sources from two publishers, with two other sources from different publishers. If you are concerned with the notability of the subject, you could try AFD. I'd expect it to be speedily kept. Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:17, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Melly Goeslaw/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk · contribs) 20:46, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found.

Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:48, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Checking against GA criteria[edit]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    In the first Indonesian Film Festival after a twelve year hiatus, which covered Indonesian movies from 2000 to 2004, This makes no sense at all.
    After refusing to perform solo concerts many times because of creative differences, in 2009, Goeslaw held her first concert, Confusing, needs clarification
    Her songwriting work has led to her being recognized as an intellectual property rights figure. What is this supposed to mean?
    I made a number of copy-edits[1], please ensure that you get a competent copy-editor to assist you before further nominations.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Spotchecks on sources OK, sources support statements, no OR, sources are RS
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    Good summary coverage
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
    NPOV
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
    Stable
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    No images used
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    On hold until 2 January for above issues to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:48, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    OK, all in order, listing as GA. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:46, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Only three prose issues? Not bad. I'll get right on it. Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:13, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've done the fixes, and have fixed a couple of mistakes / typos introduced with your copyedit. A couple questions:
  1. I'm not a big fan of 'Whilst' (to be honest, it sounds rather old-fashioned). Any particular reason to replace 'while' with 'whilst'?
  2. The source says 'popular', not 'successful'. There is a small difference between the two; for example, we could say that William Hung was successful, but his popularity would be up to debate as many of his "fans" liked him ironically.
  3. I had deliberately left 'conventional' in double quotation marks as what is conventional in one culture / era will be completely different in another. Any particular reason for dropping the double quotation marks?
Feedback would be appreciated. Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:24, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, I accept your points, Whilst/While is a British/American difference. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:46, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Melly Goeslaw. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:18, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Melly Goeslaw. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:37, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Melly_Goeslaw&oldid=1207283198"