Wikipedia:Peer review/Britney Spears/archive6
- A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for December 2008.
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…I'd like to submit this article for FAC before winter ends. The article is currently, GA but I know it could use some drastic trimming of information. I'm asking for any and all BLP and music editors to review this article, especially to help me remove any WP:FANCRUFT while preserving the subject's dignity. I'm not overly concerned with citations at the moment- once we've figured out what information to remove/replace, I'll pick a citation format for the article and adjust all the citations accordingly
Thanks, The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 09:29, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
Comments
- "recording artist and entertainer". Why not singer? WesleyDodds (talk) 10:09, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
- The sentence "The music video for "...Baby One More Time" and Spears's appearance on the cover of Rolling Stone magazine also established her as an international sex symbol, garnering controversy over the influence of her public image on teenage girls" seems out of place in the lead.
- "Spears's personal life began to gain substantial media attention after her marriage to Kevin Federline . . ." Bit of a fallacy; I remember entertainment news covering her relationship with Justin Timberlake quite extensively.
- In a narrative sense, it's odd to mention what her siblings do in the present in the paragraph talking about her birth.
- Doesn't seem necessary to list her grandparents.
- Spears' comments about "Baby One More Time"s success are unnecessary for the biography.
- "The album of the same name debuted . . ." Avoid easter egg links. Just say the name of the album.
- Combine the second paragraph about ...Baby One More Time with the first one.
- The Entertainment News Wire quote is superfluous. It's not telling us anything we don't get prior to it in the article.
- A bit odd to quote the Orlando Sentinel calling her "the Reigning Princess of Pop". Would be worth including if a more notable publication made the remark.
- "The album's lead single of the same name broke . . ." Same deal as before. Just name the song outright.
- I don't think it's notable to note that Britney supplanted Invincible at number one, since it only stayed there for a week and wasn't a strong seller in the first place. In contrast, Nevermind replacing Dangerous at number one in 1992 was a huge deal that drew commentary from every major news source.
- Don't cite IMDB.com; it's not considered an appropriate source of info, since everything is user-submitted. also, merge Spears' comments about Bush together for cohesiveness.
- Find a more notable reviewer to quote than Stylus for In the Zone.
- Summarize the annulment statement, instead of quoting it; it's rather long.
- Mention that K-Fed was her backup dancer or whatever it is he was. Mentioning his relationship with Shar Jackson is unnecessary for this article.
- For "Spears's highly anticipated performance of "Gimme More" at the 2007 MTV Video Music Awards was panned", it's better to find a single source that says it was panned instead of citing three sources that directly panned it.
- "Despite the criticism on her performance,[132] the single has achieved worldwide success". This seems rather vague, and there's an awful lot of cites at the end of the sentence.
- There's an awful lot of emphasis on that Kevin Johnson concert review. This needs to be balanced out in regards to the article as a whole.
- The "Public image" section seems unnecessary, especially since it predominantly focuses on her current situations, while earlier remarks about her image years ago are in the bio section.
There needs to be a lot of in-depth prose work done, but taking care of these points should at least make the article more presentable. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:09, 13 December 2008 (UTC)