Talk:Crystal Pite

Untitled

I am on the Kidd Pivot board of directors and am related to the artistic director, and thus am declaring a potential COI here. I made some formatting changes here, but otherwise would prefer to have a peripheral role in further edits for this reason. Fiona-bc (talk) 08:36, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Crystal Pite/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

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:

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Crystal Pite/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 08:17, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Comments

This article has been brought from a rough state to something that looks quite reasonable at first glance: sensibly structured, every paragraph cited, a mix of sources from newspapers and ballet companies. There has been a very welcome burst of activity to add suitable citations, which have strengthened the article.

However, something is not quite right here. The majority of the text is basically a list of small chunks about Pite's pieces, with very little depth about her, her style, her thought, her life. This isn't made better by the lists at the end of the article, which largely repeat facts from the text above. The citations, too, are mainly about the pieces, with little in the way of a deeper look at Pite and a wider context (her whole career, what influenced her, what influence she has had, her place in the world of contemporary dance).

I see that the article failed GA back in 2015. The reviewer noted that there were some readily fixable issues with the text and a few missing citations (there still are), but

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.

— GA review 1, 2015

Well, that's still true in 2019, and I couldn't have put it better: it says exactly what I wished to say about the article. What is needed to fix this, I think, is to

1. cut down on the talk about individual pieces
2. beef up the account of her life and thought
3. (and crucially) cite good secondary sources (books and published academic papers on modern ballet) and tertiary sources (encyclopedias...) on Pite's career, thinking, choreography, style, and contribution to the art, comparing her with other choreographers and evaluating her work.

Minor comments

• Some items require citations, both in the text and in the lists.

• Some citations are spaced from the text and followed by punctuation; I've fixed some for you.

• There is some inconsistency of spelling, e.g. "Netherlands Dance Theater" vs "Nederlands Dans Theatre" (they actually use Nederlands Dans Theater about themselves, so I'd suggest we go with that).

• There is some overlinking. I've tidied it up a bit for you.

• "In 2010, Kidd Pivot became the resident dance company" ... or perhaps she didn't. Needs name of her role.

• "When her arrangement with de:Künstlerhaus_Mousonturm expired" ... needs an inter-language link. Follow the link to see the required syntax.

Summary

This is not an immediate fail, as the article has merit and with work can be brought to GA standard. I am happy to engage in a creative dialogue on improving the article, which I think will be necessary in this case. That will demand energy and enthusiasm, and since that looks to be available, there is a good prospect of success here. There is no time limit, as long as there is a clear and demonstrated commitment and work continues at a reasonable pace. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:17, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Zochawk - a week has passed with no sign of activity on this task, nor any indication of your intentions for it. Could you please let me know how you would like to proceed with it. Many thanks, Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:05, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Well, with no indication of any intention to proceed, despite edits being made on other topics, I must reluctantly conclude that this particular project isn't going anywhere, so I'll end it now. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:53, 23 August 2019 (UTC)