Talk:Women in Latin music/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jburlinson (talk · contribs) 02:01, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be glad to review this article. I'm sorry you've had to wait so long for a response to your nomination. Comments to follow in the next 1-5 days. Thanks in advance for all your work!--Jburlinson (talk) 02:01, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, will be waiting. Best – jona ✉ 23:01, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.	On the whole, this is a well-written article. It was copy-edited by the Guild of Copy Editors, which is great!
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Quotation needs to be sourced, even though it is substantially repeated in the body of the article. Please see MOS:CITELEAD. Wikipedia's Verifiability policy requires inline citations for all quotations, anywhere in article space.
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.	Impressive work -- well done.
	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).	Other than the one quotation in the lead, mentioned above, material is well-sourced.
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Spot checks reveal no plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	This is the most problematic aspect of the article. Although the WP article for Latin Music defines this term as "any music that comes from Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking areas of the world, namely Latin America, Spain, and Portugal, as well as music sung in either language", the article has a predominant, almost exclusive focus on Latin American music. Music of Spain is mentioned only briefly in connection with Lola Flores and then again in a paragraph in the "visibility" section sourced to an article in Billboard lamenting the absence of women in contemporary music charts. This leaves out a considerable legacy starting at least with the Moorish period (good sources are The Music of Spain by Gilbert Chase and Music in Ancient Arabia and Spain by Julian Ribera) and continuing into later centuries with Gracia Baptista, who produced the first published composition by a woman composer and on into Zarzuela, with composers like Soledad Bengoecha de Cármena, and many famous women singers. There were also considerable Spanish musical movements in the 20th Century that featured female stars, like Yé-yé in the '60's (Massiel, Laura Casale, Karina and others), and, later, in the '80's, La Movida Madrileña (e.g. Alaska). Portugese music gets a little more coverage, with a good paragraph on Fado. In Latin America, although it is the focus of the article, there are some gaps: little about Bossa Nova or Ranchera, for example, with no mention of such singers as Astrud Gilberto, Lucha Villa, Rocio Dúrcal and Lola Beltrán. Also no mention of Carmen Miranda.
	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.	There is a recurring theme of the relegation of women to men, but the material is well-sourced, so, in my mind, it retains neutrality.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	It appears that there's been an attempt to change the article's name to Women in Latin American Music. While this isn't exactly an "edit-war", there does some to be discomfort with the heavy emphasis on Latin America, as mentioned above. This is also mentioned in the Talk page.
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 are plentiful, well-chosen and properly tagged. Great job!
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	There are many good things in this article and I enjoyed reading it. However, the issues regarding breadth of coverage keep it from achieving GA status, in my view. I would like to thank everyone who has contributed this article and.

Review is on-hold for a week pending response to this initial version.--Jburlinson (talk) 01:58, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rocío Jurado is mentioned in the article. There are just so many women in Latin music that it will never be satisfied. I only wrote on women whom has/had a constant presence on books during my initial findings when writing this article. Anyone is open to edit the article and add/expand on a certain genre, period, or a musician not covered in this article. If I applied every female Latin singer, then this article would be labeled as being excessive. Plus, I never heard most of the women you have mentioned which is probably why they were not included (or were but with very little coverage) in the books I searched in. Also, statements in the lead do not require a source unless it is likely to be challenged. I can't spot anything in the lead that would be challenged by a reader. Best – jona ✉ 15:03, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response. re: citing quotations in the lead -- please see WP:CS, where it says: "Wikipedia's Verifiability policy requires inline citations for any material challenged or likely to be challenged, and for all quotations, anywhere in article space." (Bold emphasis added.) The lead is part of article space, so quotations must be cited, according to this, whether or not they might be challenged.

I agree that it would never be possible to list all latin women singers in this or any article. It is not necessary for you to do so for this article to attain GA status. My comment in 3a of the table above, however, was more about gaps in genres and/or nationalities, as opposed to individual artists. Regarding Spain, for instance, the article contains historical material concerning Latin American music, which is good, in that it broadens the topic to cover not just the 20th/21st century. There is no corresponding material concerning Spain or Portugal, however. At least in the case of Spain, there is a rich pre-20th century musical history that includes accomplishments by notable women. Similarly, in the 20th century, there were genres and periods that involved significant female artists. In my view, a GA level article on "latin" music would provide the balance necessary to cover the European perspective more thoroughly, especially considering the relatively exhaustive coverage of Latin American music. Finally, the absence of a mention of Carmen Miranda is startling, since this Brazilian singer became the most globally recognizable female latin performer in the mid-20th Century, even though her Hollywood celebrity persona was somewhat on the comic side. I acknowledge that you may not be familiar with some of the names or genres that I mentioned, but, with respect, that does not mean that they do not have significance to this topic.

I'm inclined to fail the article at this point, despite the fact that it contains much good material, is well-organized, and, on the whole, well-written. If you believe that you haven't received a fair review, please feel free to re-nominate the article; although, again, I would counsel you consider broadening its scope to cover more of the European scene. I know this would require extra research, but I feel it would be necessary to achieve the breadth of coverage required for a GA article. An alternative might be to re-title the article "Women in Latin American Music", and focus exclusively on that. If you'd consider that worthwhile, I'd recommend broaching it on the talk page to give other editors a chance to weigh in. I want to thank you for your hard work on this article and your commitment to improving Wikipedia. All the best.--Jburlinson (talk) 01:11, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]