Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Peer review/Katy Perry/archive1

< Wikipedia:Peer review

Katy Perry edit

Toolbox
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 got it up to GA last week and am hoping to polish it up enough to become FA in time to be "Today's Featured Article" for her 30th birthday this upcoming October 25th. This means I will likely have to get it to FA at least one month ahead of time. Input is highly appreciated. Peer review shall close on July 11th as I plan on taking to FAC next month.

Thanks, Snuggums (talk • contributions) 20:59, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from WikiRedactor edit

  • The image in the infobox will need an alternate text description.
  • There are some external links that need to be corrected.
  • In the first sentence of the Prism section, fall (and seasons in general, for that matter) do not need to be capitalized.
  • I'm not sure perfumes need a separate section for listing the way that discography and filmography do.
  • In the filmography section, it would be helpful to include the year when each film was released.
  • I personally don't think that the succession boxes at the end of the article are necessary, I would remove them altogether.
  • I would also consider separating the templates at the end of the article from the "Links to related articles" umbrella; I think that just leaving the templates separate will be a more direct navigation.

WikiRedactor (talk) 21:37, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Retrohead edit

  • I think it would be useful to add where Perry was born and that she was raised in a patriarchal family. That would be in the second sentence from the lead, in order the reader to understand why her exposure to pop music was limited.
  • I'll see if I can find the exact location for her birth (all I know so far is that it was a hospital just outside of Santa Barbara), but so far I haven't come across anything that suggests her family was ever "patriarchal" (or matriarchal, for that matter). Snuggums (talk • contributions) 16:07, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "her family moved about seven times" — I'm sure that this would be pointed in the FAC, that if available, we should have the exact number.
  • Will do if I can find it, but for now I'll just say "often moved" or "frequently moved", sound good? Snuggums (talk • contributions) 16:07, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "At age 15, Perry's singing attracted the attention of rock veterans" — the names of the rock musicians are needed here; "At age 15"→just "at 15" is fine; "attracted the attention"→"caught the attention"; "to polish her writing skills"→"to improve her writing skills"
  • all   Done except for the names..... for now, as I'll have to search for those..... Snuggums (talk • contributions) 16:07, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "craft songs"→"write/compose songs" (more encyclopedic)
  • in order to add an "undeniable smash or two"→I think just "undeniable smash" would be fine
  • stating "They love and support me".→this could be paraphrased
  • "reached the number one position"→just reached number one
  • Teenage Dream was met with generally mixed reviews — omit generally
  • "Firework" was released as the album's third consecutive number-one on the Hot 100. — You need to clarify that it became the album's third consecutive number single. This way it seems that she knew the single was going to be number 1 before it was released.
  • In the fall of 2012, Perry told Billboard about Prism; we need to explain that Prism was her upcoming album because it is mentioned for the first time
  • her relationship with Mayer ended (explain what was the reason); "telling GQ "there's no rush" (this needs paraphrasing because it sounds slightly "mystic")
  • This is all for now. I should finish the review on Saturday. Comments on the rest of the sections coming then. Cheers.--Retrohead (talk) 09:07, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good job so far Snuggums.--Retrohead (talk) 17:22, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you sir :3 Snuggums (talk • contributions) 17:25, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • the gospel genre→ just gospel would be fine
  Done
  • At the age 15
  Done
  • inspired her music; finish the quote with attitude and omit "really"
  Done
  • drop "frequently" from the opening sentence of "Musical style and themes" and "notably" from the third
  Done
  • possesses→has would be a better word choice
  Done
  • likened→compared
  Done
  • music industry sex symbol—I believe only "music sex symbol" or even "sex symbol" would be more adequate
  Done
  • "In early November 2010"→In November 2010 (exact dates kinda drag the attention away)
  Done
  • choice of fashion→fashion choice
  Done
  • early November 2013 and late January 2014 should be November 2013 & January 2014; I've noticed that is quite frequent in the "Other ventures"
  Done
  • overall, this section could use some quote trimming; I get the impression that every second sentence contains quote marks.
  • went towards→were donated to
  Done
  • in young women; shouldn't this be at young women?
  • The charity supports young women with breast cancer, so I think "in" is fine.
  • supported President Barack Obama in his November 2012 run for re-election; the date of November 2012 is not needed here
  Done
Sorted out most of these. S△M talk 18:45, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from IndianBio edit

I'm going through the article now and jotting down comments as I go. Will paste them all together when I'm done. On way I will be copy editing also anything I find missing. —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 04:07, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Look forward to it :) Snuggums (talk • contributions) 13:17, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am done with the scanning of the whole article. I'm sorry to say at present how it is, it won't pass FAC and the whole blame comes on the prose. The main problem is not balance or anything regarding it, its just that the prose has a complete timeline way of writing. Its like someone keeping a log of Perry's important events in life in a diary. "She woke up, brushed her teeth, released 'Roar', performed at music awards, broke up with John", like this. It essentially makes the article pretty bland and has a complete monotony associated with it. When you read a book, do you find that the content is written like that? The author always tries to spice up the portions but keeping it professional. How does he do it? By adding quotes, or anecdotes, or conversation, or maybe an image. He also combines the flow so that sequences of same event are clubbed together. The pictures are all present, we need to just regurgitate them again. I will give one example from the Prism section how we can better it.
We can start with the development of the album and Perry's thoughts of changing it to a lighter version. Then, instead of going into the diary entries, we can talk about how the album did / doing commercially. Then we can talk about the singles and the promotional performances, then talk about the tour associated with the album. In this way the diary like entry is avoided and we have also clubbed sequences of same era together. I think the Lady Gaga article (though not of FA worthy obviously) has a good way of effecting this, especially in her Artpop section and pointers can be taken.
Besides that the section can contain other endeavors of Perry like that awful duet with John, her perfume and The Smurfs appearance, then any notable controversy excluding the album. In this way we are adding notable incidents from the whole zone but we are making it interesting. A reader would definitely not like to go from album → development → perfume → movies → singles → promo → breakup in that order. He/She would want to know what happens next with the exact portion he's reading and I think this is a great way of improving that. Just to remind you, this does not mean that the article has to be a QUOTEFARM. Just minor anecdotes and one liners.
I will be posting more gradually as I see more problems. —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 07:23, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a WP:TNT is needed, IndianBio. If Peter had told me about the whole "timeline" idea when reviewing the GAN, that would've been quite helpful. Of the sections that need revising, do any specific ones need more copyediting than others? Give me all you've got here- for FAC, I'm determined as top contributor to do it once and do it right. Snuggums (talk • contributions) 19:08, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@XXSNUGGUMSXX:, it is not TNT that is needed, it is a rearrangement. Why not start with the most recent section of her bio as I explained above, i.e. the Prism section. Take each and every sentence and then place them category wise. Like 1. Album, 2. Singles + promo, 3. Other endorsements. Then copyedit and expand on the prose so that the sentences flow better and makes the reader understand what he/she is reading. As I said above, it reads like a disjointed diary entry at present with ideas just thrown in buyt not combined or placed in apprrpriate areas. I can even show you for this section in the talk page of this PR if you want. —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 05:55, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'll get to that, but in such a case I'm not quite sure where her relationships with Travie and Russell would be placed for One of the Boys and Teenage Dream sections. Definitely gonna need some fiddling around since it looks like I went overboard with chronology prior to requesting the PR. Snuggums (talk • contributions) 06:28, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
IndianBio, take a look now- Samjohnzon just gave a total revamp. Snuggums (talk • contributions) 01:18, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hopefully it's an improvement, tried to organise things according to topic rather than chronologically this time. Let me know what you think, IndianBio! S△M talk 01:22, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
One thing I just realized- we forgot to include her involvement with Sesame Street, The Simpsons, How I Met Your Mother, and Raising Hope. Just trying to figure out how to incorporate them. Snuggums (talk • contributions) 02:12, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes thanks Sam, just taking a look at it and checking if the prose flows like a stream :P —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 06:42, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(→) Hi Sam, the rearrangement of the section, now the idea is to make the prose flow smoothly between these sections and the lines in each section. At present the ideas are separately listed, but the sentences do not merge into each other as a smooth prose. I am starting to give it a brush up now. Hope that would make it clear. —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 11:50, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another question, IndianBio: do you feel there's enough information available to warrant a "legacy" section or is it too soon in her career? SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 18:34, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Prism edit

  • Per WP:ALTTEXT, all the alt text descriptions of images are wrong except for the Public image section. — prism △ 12:13, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Ritchie333 edit

I've read through the lead and the first few sections. Apologies if I've repeated anything covered above.

Lead
  • "Her fourth album, Prism (2013), spawned" - not sure if "spawned" is the right word to use. Maybe redo as "She released her fourth album, Prism in 2013 which included the number-one singles "Roar" and "Dark Horse"
  • The lead says "the dissolution of her one-year marriage" but the infobox said they were married from 2010 to 2012
  • That's because they married October 2010 and the marriage ended February 2012, which really isn't two years. SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 20:16, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's one of those tricky things. If you leave it out, you can't tell they've separated. If you put "brief", well it's got nothing on Cher and Gregg Allman. Tricky one to resolve, this.
I guess "short" or "brief" would have to do. SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 21:27, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Early life and career beginnings
  • turned to God after a "wild youth" - I assume the quotation comes from the Scotsman source in the next sentence, but I would put it right up against this quotation myself.
  • "Keith formerly made and dealt LSD" - don't need "formerly", we know it was in his past
  • "Mary once dated musician Jimi Hendrix" - Hendrix's article does not mention her. "Dated Hendrix" for me means someone like Kathy Etchingham. Extraordinary claims need extraordinary sources, and I don't think The Scotman cuts it. I think this sentence can go - her parents are reformed Christians, that'll do.
  • Their relationship was only brief, which is probably why Hendrix's article didn't include it. Should I scrap the LSD part as well if getting rid of this sentence? SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 20:26, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'd get rid. It's not actually about Katy Perry per se. The source did say "dated" but, with I have a feeling they said that as a tabloid euphemism for "one night stand". Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:03, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Scrapped SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 15:13, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and an older sister named Angela" - don't need "named"
  • "Throughout their childhood, they attended religious schools and camps, including Santa Barbara Christian School" - do you mean the whole family, or just the children
  • "E! Special: Katy Perry" needs a time as to where the supporting information can be located.
  • In general, I think some (but not all) of the sources in this section are a bit tabloidish, and you may come unstuck at FAC where reviewers tend to demand higher quality sources such as officially authorised biographies, or at least commercial books from good publishers.
Well I had a quick pop onto Google Books and there were a couple of biographies, though nothing that I would think would reach critical acclaim. Sorry I can't be more specific. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:03, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I meant which sources looked questionable/tabloidish. SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 15:51, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think Seventeen and OC Weekly were the obvious ones. None of the sources are unreliable per se - they got passed a GA review after all, but are they the absolute highest quality sources going? It's more a gut feeling that at FAC showing evidence of consulting a good in-depth printed biography shows you're serious about providing the best possible sources.

Katy Hudson and The Matrix
  • "In December 1999, Perry completed her GED" - readers outside North America don't know what the General Education Development is - this should be spelled out in full.
  • "At fifteen" - up until this point, ages have been numeric. I'd do with numbers.
  • "her singing caught the attention of rock veterans from Nashville, Tennessee," - "veterans" is often used to mean a retired soldier or general. Do we know whose specific attention she caught?
  • "before the label ceased operations in December 2001" - don't need 2001, the paragraph has established we're talking about that year
  • "Following a terminated record deal" - not sure what is meant. Did the contracts get signed and then dropped after unsuccessful recording, did the paperwork just not work out, or something else. I think this needs to be clearer.
  • "She was dropped by her third record label," - state the label directly
  • " In the interim of being signed to another label" - "During this time" might be simpler

I'll see if I can comment further on the article later. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:47, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Things are looking better. I'd merge the last two sentences of the second paragraph in "Early life and career beginnings", but I can't think of anything else right now. I assume you've looked through Binksternet's comments and applied the MOS issues generally throughout the article. I'll try and see if I can look at more of it soon! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:57, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I have addressed his concerns. SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 21:27, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OK I've now found the names of the veterans (from Alice Hudson's biography), used Kimberly Dillon Summers' biography in place of Seventeen (though moved that ref to later in the article where she speaks to the magazine), looking for a better ref for OC Weekly. As for merging..... Sam, it might have been a bit long, so here's what we can do:
Original text: "Her family 'barely got by' financially during her childhood and adolescence. The family sometimes ate from the food bank intended to feed the congregation at her parents' church, and used food stamps."
What I used (and you found "long winded"): "Her family 'barely got by' financially during her childhood and adolescence and sometimes ate from the food bank intended to feed the congregation at her parents' church, and used food stamps."
Proposal: "Her family 'barely got by' financially during her childhood and adolescence, sometimes eating from the food bank intended to feed the congregation at her parents' church, and used food stamps."
Ritchie, if you or Sam have any better suggestions to merge, feel free to state them. SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 01:35, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This is a really tricky one to word. It feels like if we have two 'and's in the same sentence it may be a bit too long a sentence, but if we repeat "The family" twice it feels too repetitive. Perhaps "Her family 'barely got by' financially, sometimes using food stamps and eating from the food bank intended to feed the congregation at her parents' church."? It's obvious to the reader this section is about her childhood, so it doesn't necessarily have to be specified. S△M talk 15:18, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Works for me. Gonna go with that. SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 15:44, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Binksternet edit

  • Looks like the clunky prose will prevent this article from achieving FA. Staccato sentences such as "She grew up in Santa Barbara, California," stand out as examples of poor writing. (Her hometown couldn't be worked more gracefully into some other sentence?)
  • Because of the result of The/the Beatles RfC, the musical group the Matrix should have lower case the in running prose, not capitalized The.
  • In running prose, city/state formulations should end in a comma. The phrase "born near Santa Barbara, California to Pentecostal pastors" should be "born near Santa Barbara, California, to Pentecostal pastors". Later on, the same problem shows up in "Hollywood Bowl in Los Angeles, California on October..." which should have a comma after California.
  • Rather than calling her parents by their first names, I think the encyclopedia should say "her father" and "her mother". For instance, instead of saying "through Mary, she is a half-niece", the article should say "through her mother, Perry is a half-niece".
  • This wording is wrong in two ways: "Between the ages of 3–11, her family frequently moved ..." First off, per MOS:ENDASH, when giving a range of numbers separated by an en dash, we should never say "between" or "from". If those words are used, then the numbers should be separated by a preposition; for instance "from 3 to 11" or "between 3 and 11". The second problem is that her family was not aged 3 to 11 when they moved. Perry was that age range, not the whole family, despite what the sentence suggests. The paragraph continues "Throughout their childhood", assumed to mean the family's childhood, which is nonsense, or the siblings' childhood, which is not defined. Of course we are talking about Perry's childhood. It is not necessary to use "they" or "their" to include Perry's siblings; the article is about Katy Perry, not her siblings. The sentence "They sometimes ate from the food bank intended to feed the congregation at her parents' church" should be "The family sometimes ate from the food bank intended to feed the congregation at her parents' church".
  • Per MOS:ENDASH, the phrase "from the ages of 9–16" should be "from the ages of 9 to 16".
  • Pedantic: Do we really have to be told that singing at age 9 came "before" getting a guitar at age 13?
  • Per MOS:NUMERAL, the ages 9 and 13 should both be spelled out or both be numerals, not mixed in the same sentence.
  • Is it vitally important that Perry's dancing lessons were conducted in "a recreation building in Santa Barbara"?
  • Per WP:DASH, the article should settle on either unspaced em dashes for sentence interruptions, or spaced en dashes. I see that both kinds are used.
  • Per WP:NBSP, million dollar figures require a non-breaking space between the numeral and the "million", or a nowrap template can be used.
  • Per MOS:DATE, a month/day/year formulation should always be followed with a comma in running prose, so "April 28, 2008 as the lead single" should be "April 28, 2008, as the lead single". Same with "released on October 18, 2013 and debuted" which should be "released on October 18, 2013, and debuted". Same with "engaged on December 31, 2009 while vacationing" which should be "engaged on December 31, 2009, while vacationing". As well, "on December 10, 2011 with Robyn" should be "on December 10, 2011, with Robyn". Finally, "text message on December 30, 2011 that he was divorcing" should be "text message on December 30, 2011, that he was divorcing".
  • The first instance of a reference should be the full citation rather than a named ref. An example is the bit about Perry's mother "dating" Hendrix (does this signify a brief backstage romance or something more meaningful?) which is supported by a named reference "GraffBold", but the full GraffBold reference comes later.
  • I'm stopping my prose review at the year 1999. The article needs a lot of prose and manual-of-style work to move ahead. Binksternet (talk) 16:55, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Closing comments edit

@WikiRedactor, Retrohead, IndianBio, Prism, Ritchie333, and Binksternet: thank you gentlemen for all your comments. It's now been one month since this was opened, and at the time I said it would close July 11th. That day has arrived, but since Ritchie333 and Binksternet haven't reviewed the article in full yet, I'll give you another week for any additional word. IndianBio, I'm gonna add some more details and tweaks. Afterwards, hopefully you can polish this with a good copyedit so it—in your words—flows like a stream. Still not ready for FAC yet, but I'm gonna get it there. SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 22:57, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I did mean to spend an hour or two wrapping it up yesterday, but got distracted. Sorry, I really will try and wrap things up in the coming week. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:37, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Look forward to it, Ritchie333 :). SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 15:24, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Katy_Perry/archive1&oldid=1140396348"