Talk:Crystal Pite/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Onel5969 (talk · contribs) 20:54, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

This may take a couple of days, please be patient.

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

   no copyvios, some grammar issues:

Lead: Recommend use of "founded" rather than "created" for Kidd Pivot; I think you need explain what "Kunstlerhaus Mousonturm" is, the average joe who knows nothing about ballet won't have a clue.

Early life: "Pite choreographed on her classmates"? How does that work?; "called In the Middle, Somewhat Elevated" needs to be set off by commas.

Ballett Frankfurt: First sentence is seems very un-encyclopedic. I think it needs to be toned down to simply "she was impressed with Forsythe's style and..."; also look out for words like "excite", simply say "Pite developed choreography with ...";

Return to BC: Lost Action - "focus" on the performance, rather than "enhance" works better; "Beethoven's Piano Sonata No. 32, which is also the music ..." should simply be "Beethoven's Piano Sonata No. 32, the music ...", and the next sentence should read "focused on"; "Pite choreographed a solo on Louise Lecavalier" should be "for Louise Lecavalier".

Longer pieces: no issues.

Return to Frankfurt: "Kidd Pivot signed a two-year deal (which was later extended to three years)" drop the "which was".

Recent and upcoming: "It was danced to Adès' song Polaris" - should be a comma after Polaris; the "and" beginning the next sentence needs to be capitalized - or change the period before it to a comma, and change the and to "as well as featuring".

Personal life - no issues.

Overall - I think my biggest issue is the depth of coverage of each of her pieces. The article is greatly expanded by the length of discussion on many or her pieces. I looked at other GA articles in the dance project, such as Kenneth MacMillan, Arthur Sullivan, Jacques Offenbach, Misty Copeland, and Sergei Prokofiev - none of those articles goes into anywhere near the depth that this article does on the artist's individual pieces. To me, that makes the article less about her, and more about the pieces. I think this is a major roadblock to passing GA.

1. B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   references are well formatted

   B. Cites reliable sources, where necessary:

   There are several dead links (#8, #14, #18)

   C. No original research:

   Probably not, but can't verify the info which is verified by the dead links.

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   Covers all the aspects of this choreographer

   B. Focused (see summary style):

   Same issue as I state above in 1a.

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

   No POV issue

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

   very stable

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   No copyright issues with current photos

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

   Nice relevance to the article, suitably captioned.

7. Overall: No work done on the article in months. Once the items are corrected, feel free to re-nominate.

   Pass or Fail: