Talk:Randy Travis/GA1

GA Review

Passed. Lightburst (talk) 23:25, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

I would love to review this article about hall of fame country music star Randy Travis. Reviewer: Lightburst (talk · contribs) 17:29, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

9144 words so it make take a few days to review. I will work on this.

Suggestions

Lead, I have trouble finding this in the body. (charted more than 50 singles on the Billboard Hot Country Songs charts)

Lead - suggest encyclopedic description instead of "broke through"

Lead -Suggest using the word several in place of (a number of) in the lead

Biography - suggest changing acquired to (committed a number of criminal offenses)

Biography - Ricky dropped out of the competition partway through as he has to serve time at a youth detention center, (This sentence should probably replace has with had)

Biography - coming under custody of the Hatchers suggest adding (the) before custody

Biography - "club after a number of altercations with patrons" (a number of) is not specific so I suggest changing a few of the seven occurrences. For this occurance I suggest omitting so that it just reads (club after altercations with patrons)

1985–1986: Storms of Life section - popular in sales and listener demand in spite of its initially low chart peak. Instead of "in spite of" suggest (despite)

1987–1988: Always & Forever - During promotion of the album. suggest adding (the) before promotion

1987–1988: Always & Forever - instead of the link to Vanderbilt University ink to Vanderbilt University Medical Center

1988–1990: Old 8×10 and No Holdin' Back - but was moved up to June 30 in order to make it eligible for CMA Awards. Instead of (in order to) suggest just (to)

1990–1992: Heroes & Friends, High Lonesome, and greatest-hits albums - Friends" at the 1991 CMA awards telecast - I think awards should be capitalized in this use.

1990–1992: Heroes & Friends, High Lonesome, and greatest-hits albums - refused to answer them as he did not think the song itself was political in nature. suggest removing the words (in nature)

1990–1992: Heroes & Friends, High Lonesome, and greatest-hits albums - Despite these songs' successes at radio, suggest (on radio)

1992–1995: Wind in the Wire and This Is Me - singles reaching top 40 on the Billboard charts.[2] However, lead single. suggest adding (the) before lead single

1996–1997: Full Circle -failed to reach top 20 on the country charts, suggest (the) before top 20.

1996–1997: Full Circle - Ely considered the album "strong as ever", with focus on Lehning's production. suggest adding (a) before focus

1996–1997: Full Circle - Don Yates found influence of honky-tonk. Suggest adding (the) before influence

1996–1997: Full Circle - disagreements over promotion of Full Circle. suggest adding (the) before promotion

1997–1999: DreamWorks Records - The track won Grammy Award for Best Country. suggest (a) before Grammy

2000–2003: Switch to gospel and "Three Wooden Crosses" - Rise and Shine won Grammy Award. suggest adding (a) before Grammy

2000–2003: Switch to gospel and "Three Wooden Crosses" - "Pray for the Fish" won Dove Award. suggest adding (a) before Dove

2003–2007: Continued gospel albums - It, too, won Grammy Award for Best Southern. Suggest adding (a) before Grammy

2008–2011: Return to Warner and Carrie Underwood version of "I Told You So" - Travis promoted the album on an interview. suggest (in) an interview

Personal life - Because of the serecy of their marriage - misspelling of secrecy

Personal life - In early 1991, tabloid National Enquirer - Suggest adding (the) before tabloid

Personal life - Journalist Michael Corcoran noted that Travis's and Hatcher's marriage. I think just (Travis) or you can scrap this and just say {their marriage)

Personal life - while intoxicated and terroristic threat against a public servant. Should it be (threats)?

Personal life - Dash cam - WP has it as one word (dashcam)

Personal life - In July 2013, Travis exeperienced difficulty - experienced is misspelled

Personal life - while working at out at his home gym. extra word (at)

Personal life - pneumonia led to Travis under going three - I think undergoing is one word

I think I addressed all the issues above. As for the count of 50 singles, the Whitburn source lists "Angels" as his 50th charted single (every chart entry has a number before it) so I added a mention there. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 18:50, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TenPoundHammer: Thanks, I really enjoy the article. I hope to continue reviewing and complete this by the weekend. I will spot check citations. One concern is the image of the mural. But I am not 100% sure about the suitability based on 2d US FOP so lets not delete it yet. We may need to ask a commons expert. Lightburst (talk) 19:00, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TenPoundHammer: Lightburst (talk) 19:01, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good article @TenPoundHammer:. Thanks for sticking with me to address minor issues. Lightburst (talk) 23:20, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Citations

Done Earwig only shows to song titles, so no issue

WP:ALLMUSIC is a yellow source in Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources and it is used for twenty citations. Suggest we try to replace some of these sources.

It seems the issue is only when AllMusic is used for biographical information. For verifying a track listing or quoting a review, there seem to be no issues. Are there cases where you think its use may be dubious? Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 20:55, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think where there are more robust sources which say the same thing, we should think about using them. The very first one in the article is citing biographical details. Lightburst (talk) 22:17, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Cusic source is used 50+ times for citations. Are there any of these citations which can be replaced? Also see the source here but our citations do not have a link to it. Appears to be a good source so if you cannot I understand. My concern, there are 194 references and this source accounts for 25% of all citations. Then the other source allmusic accounts for 10% of all citations. Lightburst (talk) 22:43, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the one AllMusic ref and tried to condense some of the Cusic references where I could. I also added a link to the archive.org upload. I couldn't immediately find anything to balance out the Cusic references in the first half of the article, but it should be good as the book does appear to be reputable. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 04:43, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for checking that out. I will continue reviewing. I am on citation checking today. I posted a question about the mural image on WP:GA but nobody responded. Hopefully we will hear something soon. Lightburst (talk) 15:02, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done Spot checked biography, music career and storms of life sections.

Done Spot checked 1987–1988: Always & Forever section

Done Spot checked references in the article.

Review chart

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
Is it verifiable with no original research?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

B. 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):

C. It contains no original research:

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Article is stable.
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
Unsure about the mural because the US does not have FOP for 2d art Lightburst (talk) 18:55, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
I would prefer more images of the subject, but the images of other stars are related. Lightburst (talk) 18:55, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
Good work

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.