Wikipedia:Peer review/Beyoncé/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Beyoncé Knowles

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I just recently did a revamp and I would like to know if what other things to do for it to reach GA, or possible go directly to FA.

Thank you folks. --Efe (talk) 12:40, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Comments by Wackymacs (talk · contribs)[edit]

  • Reference 9 - an encyclopedia citing another encyclopedia is...dodgy. That Encyclopædia Britannica page doesn't actually cite its sources.
  • Many of your references are missing date info (not access date, but the date the original page was put up). For example, ref 10 has a date on the page: 1998.
    • Maybe some of those you pointed out do not have publication date in its page. I'll take a look, though. But Im pretty sure they're all filled up properly. --Efe (talk) 06:15, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Some might criticize this because you have used MTV News as a source a lot.
    • She's a singer so I depend a lot on MTV News. But I will do a clean up. --Efe (talk) 06:15, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you want this to become featured some day, the footnotes need to be perfect.
    • What do you mean by this? --Efe (talk) 06:15, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I mean, you want to make sure all the information is filled out (access dates, publisher info, and so on). Otherwise, someone is going to pick on the footnotes when it comes to the FA. Take a look at WP:FAC, and you'll notice that footnotes are often highlighted. — Wackymacs (talk) 07:18, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Yah. They're all filled up. Some do not have publication dates, but surely they all have accessdates, excluding offline sources. Some do not have publishers, as they appear to be the same with the work parameter. --Efe (talk) 07:42, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Personal Life section is short.
    • I will probably integrate this to the song-writing sub-section. There's a part there which is related to it. --Efe (talk) 06:15, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is a bit of over-linking - for example, in the "Dangerously in Love (2003) and stardom" section (last paragraph) - there is no need to link those years in brackets.
    • They're actually linked not linked to a date. Like 2008, its linked to the article about 2008 Grammy Awards. --Efe (talk) 06:15, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Overall, very good.
  • Submit this to WP:GA now - it will be nominated.

— Wackymacs (talk) 17:02, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    • Very, very soon. Probably after the PR. --Efe (talk) 06:15, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • You might even consider skipping GA and going straight to FA, since it's already so good. — Wackymacs (talk) 07:18, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Probably after the PR. Im not an English-native so it would be helpful to put this PR a while to ensure that grammar/prose issues are resolved. Thanks for the suggestion. --Efe (talk) 07:42, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Realist2 (talk · contribs)[edit]

  • Some picture captions are monster long.
    • Which of those? I suspect one of the images you are referring is that one on the Destiny's Child section. I will edit it. --Efe (talk) 06:22, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • After the lead pic, picture 1,5 and 6. Realist2 (talk) 14:39, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • I cleaned it up. --Efe (talk) 01:41, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • I first caption still burns my eyes. Dont color coordinate them. Just say left to right , shelly, betty, sam and fred.. Realist2 (talk) 01:50, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
            • I dont know how to fix it. --Efe (talk) 02:04, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
              • That info is too indepth, it should go in the content of the article. The caption should just read ....the original line up of destiny child. Realist2 (talk) 02:09, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ok, I will edit that later. --Efe (talk) 02:37, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree that personal life section almost seems pointless either expand it or intergrate that little paragraph into the rest art article.
    • See comment above. --Efe (talk) 06:22, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • For the legacy section are those sub headings really needed when its so small.
    • I think it should be like that. Philantrophy is very much different with that of the Inluence. --Efe (talk) 06:22, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ya know i dont even need to continue, this is easily GA, id stick it up for nomination if i were you. Just sort out those bloody captions, they hurt my eye's. ;-] Realist2 (talk) 04:26, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Ealdgyth (talk · contribs)[edit]

I didn't read it for prose, just looked at the sources. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:37, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    • I believe you have a lot to do in FAC room so checking sources of this article is a great help. Anyway, if you're really interested with prose checking, it would be good. Hehe. Thanks. --Efe (talk) 02:55, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Mangostar (talk · contribs)[edit]

I didn't read the article thoroughly, but I think it would be improved by the addition of a short section about her personal life. Mangostar (talk) 17:14, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it because, as per above, its pointless. Nothing could be explained more but just rumors, here and there. But the section appears on the page right now as my and another user is having a slight "edit war". --Efe (talk) 05:51, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: If the "marriage" issue is confirmed by Beyonce herself, I will outrightly add that section (or improve). --Efe (talk) 05:51, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Also I agree with Indopug that another image might be better for the infobox. The current one is clearly very high-res, but I think she looks dowdy and unlike her normal self. Mangostar (talk) 01:00, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by indopug (talk · contribs)[edit]

A few quick comments;

  • Add the image listed on the left of the thumbnail here to the infobox.
  • That "beyonce beginnings" pic doesn't nearly, in any way, merit inclusion on fair-use basis. Please remove it.
    • What possible image suits fair use for this section? It should have one, I think. --Efe (talk) 05:59, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • It still doesn't significantly increase our understanding of the matter at hand...Actually keep it, we'll think of fair-use later (won't pass on FAC though)
  • Not sure why that non-free Destiny pic is there either, its more suited for the Destiny's Child article.
    • Its like, the video helped the eventual departure of the two. hehe. --Efe (talk) 05:59, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • This article is about Beyonce not Destiny.
  • That Austin Powers screenshot needs to be commented upon, as in discuss her appearance in the pic or something. As of now it does not significantly increase our understanding of the prose to merit inclusion.
    • I will remove it. Nothing to depict very important. --Efe (talk) 05:59, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move Philanthropy to Business ventures (renamed to something like Other ventures) and Influences to the Artistry section (renamed to Style and Influences or the like; I really dislike the current section name)
      • Ok. I'll try merging them. --Efe (talk) 05:59, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The discography section should only be a list of her studio albums. The rest of the details can be added to the discog article.
    • Ok. I will remove them. --Efe (talk) 05:59, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Check for overlinking throughout. Linking only first mention of Rolling Stone, song titles is enough.
    • OK. Will try copy editing. --Efe (talk) 05:59, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Ruhrfisch (talk · contribs)[edit]

As requested, here are my comments on the article - hope they help to improve it:

  • A model article or two to follow is always useful - I note Mariah Carey is FA. She is also a singer and has made films, although she was not in a group.
    • I'll take a look. --Efe (talk) 02:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I like that there are critical reactions throughout. Also like the new lead image - looks more like her than the previous one did.
    • Thank you. Indo suggested that the image should be replaced, seconded by Mangostar. --Efe (talk) 02:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree that this could use a copyedit - FA asks for prose that is near brilliant. For example (random sentence) Although it was a commercial success, the short-time production of the album was the critics' subject of scrutiny. might be better as Although it was a commercial success, the realtively short time for production of the album was the subject of critical scrutiny. Or this Despite all her song-writer stints since the release of the group's debut album, her involvement was attached to media scrutiny. Have you asked WP:LOCE?
    • I will not ask the project for now. User:Esprit15d is conducting a copy edit and some users are ready to ce the article. Hopefully, "bad grammars" will be rectified. --Efe (talk) 02:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per WP:MOS#Images do not sandwich text between images (the pictures in Personal life and Style and image sections sandwich the text).
  • Also set images to just thumb width (per MOS) and let reader preferences dictate image size.
    • I set other images because obviously they're too small. --Efe (talk) 02:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • References look OK to me
    • Thank you. I really suck at grammars (Im not English-native speaker) and I have to ask somebody else to correct them. --Efe (talk) 02:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Any reason why her Destiny's Child albums are not listed in the Discography?
    • Ooops! I forgot to add. --Efe (talk) 02:09, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hope this helps, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:51, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Beyoncé/archive1&oldid=1078817960"