Wikipedia:Peer review/Dr. Dre/archive1

Dr. Dre[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

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 April 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…I have significantly contributed to the article since late 2007 and feel that it might fit into good or even featured status. Thus, I'd like further feedback on how to improve it. It is much more well-sourced than ever before and well-developed into the subject's life.

Thanks, Andrewlp1991 (talk) 15:07, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: Interesting article, obviously a lot of work has gone into it. Here are some suggestions for further improvement, looking mostly at GA but also with an eye to possible FA status (still a ways to go):

It is useful to have a model article or two to follow, there are several musician FAs and GAs, 50 Cent is a GA and may be a good model for style, structure, etc.
I think the lead should be another paragraph - see WP:LEAD. My rule of thumb is that every section header should be in the lead somehow, and nothing should be just in the lead. For example World Class Wreckin' Cru is not in the lead now.
I would give his full name and date of birth in the Early life section and give the place of his birth. I would also cite the fact that his parents were unmarried when he was born. Calling him their "first child" seems to imply that they had other children - they should be mentioned if they exist, or perhaps say "first and only child" if that is the case.
Article could use a copy edit - just from Early life there is a missing word in both of whom [are] now deceased, although this could also be shortened to both now deceased. Another missing word in During Verna's marriage to Curtis Crayon, Andre and brother Tyree were cared [for] mostly by their father Curtis... The first sentence is a bit awkward too, as is the repeated use of "impregnated".
Refs usually come right after punctuation, often at the end of a sentence.
Try to provide context for the reader - see WP:PCR. For example, how about giving years in the World Class Wreckin' Cru section, or when he started high school, for example.
Final album and Film production are both very short sections - could they be expanded or combined with other sections?
Artists usually have some sort of critical reception section - what do critics say about Dr. Dre and his music?

Hope this helps, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:23, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Actually, in the "early life" section, "are" isn't necessary because the deceased mention is actually a participial phrase, not a sentence. And "impregnated" is only used twice, so it's not repetitive. OK i will put "are" there.--Andrewlp1991 (talk) 22:26, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, musical artist articles should have critical reception, but not necessarily in a section. See the featured articles on the bands Godsmack and Pearl Jam - reception is integrated throughout the chronological sections of the article. At least the Dre article has sections on his musical styles/work ethic. --Andrewlp1991 (talk) 22:49, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Issues resolved

Clarified parts about Dre's family and corrected grammar there as well.
*The article also already lists that he joined WCWC in 1984.
*Also fixed reference styles and section styles; expanded film section as well.
*Removed unsourced, potentially libelous claim about Snoop Dogg ghostwriting certain songs, in accordance with WP:BLP procedure.

Err, you'll have to open the source of this peer review to find which issues I resolved. Did i do something wrong here? --Andrewlp1991 (talk) 22:54, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Now that the Dre article is a good article nominee, I'd like to close this review. Thank you for your feedback, editors. --Andrewlp1991 (talk) 04:05, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]