Talk:Kesha/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: TonyTheTiger (talk · contribs) 14:38, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:LEAD
  • Is "...drawing her vocal talent to question" grammatically correct?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:35, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Not done It reads fine to me. If you can suggest a better rewording, I'd be happy to change it. --Thevampireashlee (talk) 07:57, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • How about changing "drawing her vocal talent to question" to "have led to scrutiny regarding her vocal talent," "have brought attention to the controversy surrounding her true vocal talent," or "leading to curiosity about her vocal talent level."--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:33, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Early life
2009–10
Animal and Cannibal
  • Is something missing in this sentence:"Soon after, Kesha signed a multi-album deal with RCA Records through Dr. Luke's imprint, after negotiations with Lava Records and Flo Rida's record label, Atlantic Records as well."--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:13, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Done It's a complete thought, an awkwardly worded one yes. Rewrote for clarity. --Thevampireashlee (talk) 07:57, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • The sentence continues to have two main problems:
        1. It begins with "Soon after". This is not only the first sentence of a paragraph, but also the first sentence of a section. As a result, if soon after is a referent to a prior paragraph and section, it must be reworded. It seems to mean soon after the stuff in the last section. This is not proper sentence construction for the first sentence of a section.
        2. The part beginning with "after negotiations with Lava Records" seems to be run on or something because it is not referring to the subject prior to the comma. I.e., Dr. Luke's imprint is not being modified by the after negotiations stuff. You need to either rearrange or make this a separate sentence that is a complete thought.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:21, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "She had accumulated over 200 songs which forced her to increase the tracklisting from the intended twelve songs to fourteen." is unclear to me. What does "accumulated over 200 songs"? Why did that necessitate adding 2 songs?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:13, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Done She couldn't decide on just 12. She liked too many songs. Clarified. --Thevampireashlee (talk) 07:57, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "First single, "Tik Tok" topped the charts in eleven countries and set the weekly record for the most digital downloads of a female artist and became the second best-selling single in a week in the US, after "Right Round", by shifting 610,000 copies."
    • Shifting?
    • Has the record been broken. Not done
    • Second best selling single of all-time? Not done--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:13, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      •  DoneI recycled text from Tik Tok which explained it better. It's not the best selling single of all-time. It sold the most copies for a digital single in one week. --Thevampireashlee (talk) 23:00, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      •  Done "Shifts" is the text used by Billboard. It's jargony. I reworded the entire sentence, because it was really really confusing. --Thevampireashlee (talk) 07:57, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is "Talent Agencies Act" a federal or state statute?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:13, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "play the role of the devil on the song "What Baby Wants"" confuses me.
    • Is it a video role, a duet song or what?
    • Is the song from a known album?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:13, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      •  Done Expanded on these points. She "sings" from the perspective of a devil character in the song. It's a persona. --Thevampireashlee (talk) 07:57, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • As written, it is still unclear whether she sings/performs on the track or performs in the video.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:49, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          •  Done I believe I worded this better. If this is insufficient, I do not know how to make it clearer. There is no music video for the song. She sings as the devil. Please leave a suggested wording if this is not good enough.--Thevampireashlee (talk) 23:00, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
2011-present
Second Studio Album

Additional changes[edit]

  •  Done 2b - I believe I fixed all the citation issues. But since I have never used this tool and find it difficult to interpret the data, I could be wrong. --Thevampireashlee (talk) 08:25, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Done 6a - I added the template to each image.--Thevampireashlee (talk) 08:25, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Done 6b - I checked the captions against the wording guideline and against their source pages to ensure accuracy. --Thevampireashlee (talk) 08:25, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Final review[edit]

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). Two citations remain at issue.
2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. Images all need {{personality rights}}
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. WP:CAPTIONs almost all need review. See the wording section as it relates to complete sentences.
7. Overall assessment. The article is getting close. I will be watching it for the next week. Please respond to the remaining concerns.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:09, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am now passing the article.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:09, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kesha/GA1&oldid=967079230"