Talk:Trenyce/Archive 1

Biography assessment rating comment

WikiProject Biography Summer 2007 Assessment Drive

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 14:44, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

This II tour performer, etc. I'm not sure what to do with it. Thoughts? --Unclewalrus 20:24, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Reply: The bio is straight off trenyceonline.com, Trenyce's official webpage. Hope this helps.

The performance of Proud Mary was certainly not "subdued."

Update: More neutral article has been created. 65.138.42.155 15:43, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Neutrality

I didn't read much past ""I will see you amongst the stars," said the gifted singer, Jennifer Holiday, who inspired Trenyce to follow her heart and use her talent to touch other's souls through the gift of song.". But that was enough. :) Mad Jack O'Lantern 06:39, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Criminal Record

I read somewhere that she had been arrested on a felony theft charge. Is this true? If so, I think it's worth putting in. Spartacusprime 14:55, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

True. According to The Smoking Gun, she was arrested on shoplifting charges in 1999, when she was 17 or 18. As with most first offenders was placed in a pretrial diversion program and by completing the program successfully and staying out of trouble for a period of time, her record was expunged. Were that all to it, I would say leave it out of the article. However, the TSG report was published during the American Idol finals, right around the time Corey Clark was disqualified for his own felony arrest, and not long after two semifinalists including Frenchie Davis were expelled due to past indiscretions. Trenyce's mug shots were particularly unflattering and were widely circulated on the Internet. It's believed that the disclosure seriously damaged her chances in the competition, and for that reason I think we have to make some mention of it. In fairness, the mention should include her age at the time and the fact that her record was cleared. 72.73.214.14 15:17, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Moved comment from subpage

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Trenyce/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Is there a felony in 1999 in research? Please help Trenyce by correcting mugshots.com (Google)

Last edited at 12:36, 25 December 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 09:14, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Assessment

Assessment comments

I have assessed the article at C-class. In my opinion, it is close to B-class, but has three main problems: (1) It relies heavily on footnote #1 which is probably not a reliable source; (2) it is missing a critical reaction section (there is too much discussion of her own opinions about herself and her influences – it would be more encyclopedic to discuss critical opinions of her work instead); and (3) it needs a good copy edit – I saw several sloppy errors (I fixed a few, but there are too many for me to fix now). -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:50, 24 October 2016 (UTC) @Ssilvers: Thank you for your copyedits and for the assessment. I have a couple of quick questions/comments about the three points you raised: 1) This is probably obvious, but what about the first source makes it unreliable? I am just wondering since I do not think I will be able to find anything that will replace it. 2) I agree with you, unfortunately I do not believe that I can find enough reliable sources to build section with critical opinions of her work. I used the "influences" section in the Beyonce article (which is obviously a lot better than my attempt at an article), and I noticed that section used quotes from the artist to describe the artist's influence so that was part of my reasoning for constructing this section this way. This is the first time I have ever worked on an article like this so that is probably why I am confused so I apologize for this >< 3) I completely agree with this point. I expanded this article over the span of roughly a day, and I have submitted a request at the WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors for a c/e. Thank you again for your help, and I apologize for the long message. I have withdrawn the GAN for this, and I may or may not try for it once the WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors c/e it (if you think that is a wise course of action). Aoba47 (talk) 20:50, 24 October 2016 (UTC) (1) It's an article about her written by herself, so it's not an objective assessment. WP:SPS says: "Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves... so long as: the material is neither unduly self-serving [some of this is self-serving]...; it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the source [some of it is about events not directly related to her]...; the article is not based primarily on such sources [too much of the article is cited to this source]. The article had been cited through the Wayback machine, but I see that it is available at the magazine's website, so I just now simplified the ref. Can you confirm the date of publication? Anyhow, I think it can be cited for non-controversial stuff like what her parents did for a living, but the career information should be cited to reviews and other third-party sources. (2) She performed on American Idol (there should be lots of articles about those performances online) and in national tours and other theatre productions. There must be newspaper reviews of her. There *must* have been someone who wrote about Taboo, Dreamgirls, Thriller, etc. You may need to go to the library to look at newspaper archives from the cities where the performances took place, if they are not online. In my opinion, the "artistry" sections in pop stars' WP articles are often the cruftiest, poorest-written and least encyclopedic sections of those articles. Sure, one or two well-chosen quotes from the subject are OK, but it is more interesting what perceptive third-party observers think of the subject and her style than what the subject thinks of herself. But you have certainly improved the article a lot. One thing that you could do before going to GA is a WP:Peer review. Good luck with advancing it further. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:33, 24 October 2016 (UTC) @Ssilvers: Thank you for your responses, and I tried my best with it (I want to experiment around with different types of articles so I apologize again for the silly mistakes in there). For some reason, I thought the entire thing was an interview, and I did not recognize that it was written by Trenyce herself. I apologize for missing that, as I don't know how that happened. And you are correct, I am sure there are more references out there somewhere (most likely with newspaper reviews as you have already mentioned) and I agree that it would be better to have a third-party critic or observer and his or her take on the subject and her style and work. I was really confused about what constitutes as "artistry" section, so thank you for helping me to understand it. A peer review would be the best place to go before jumping straight to GAN. I will probably stop here with the expansion/development of the article, as I am not that invested in it (and I have currently very busy with an internship and school so I do not think I can make a big time/energy commitment to tracking down sources for this). Thank you again for taking the time to respond and help me with this article (especially with the copyedits as they improved the article a great deal!) I am still trying to figure out how to do everything on Wikipedia so I always appreciate learning from a more experienced user. Maybe someone more experience/qualified will pick up on this someday in the future. Aoba47 (talk) 00:41, 25 October 2016 (UTC) OK. Congratulations with the progress you've made. No need to apologize, as you did a lot of good work here. Good luck with all your endeavors! If you have time to do just one more thing here before you go, I would add the names of the cities/towns where the theatre productions took place to the "notes" column. -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:26, 25 October 2016 (UTC) @Ssilvers: I apologize for the delay in my response. I have added some of the cities for the productions that were done in one location. More research would need to be done for the tours in order to find the locations for those. Hope this helps. I might work on this every now and then in the future, but I am definitely in over my head with this one, as I am still relatively new to Wikipedia, and this is not my area of expertise. Aoba47 (talk) 18:02, 27 October 2016 (UTC) Great. No need to be more specific about the tours. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:17, 27 October 2016 (UTC) Thank you for the clarification. Aoba47 (talk) 18:23, 27 October 2016 (UTC) @Ssilvers: Hello again! If you have the time, could you look over this article again? I believe it is at the level of a GA (it still needs a lot of work and expansion to get farther than that). Thank you in advance! Aoba47 (talk) 21:40, 19 December 2016 (UTC) Hi. The article is more complete, but I do not think it is GA quality. There is still far too much material in it quoting the subject. I don't really care *why* she did a project; I want to know what the critics thought of her performance. Also, there is too much name-dropping. It doesn't matter who she worked with. Most notable people have worked with other notable people. You don't need to say that a cast-mate was also at AGT, for example, unless the person named is somehow important to the subject's career. I copy edited a short section and found lots of repetition. "Arrested" is the same as placed in custody. Don't say things twice. Focus on her actual career achievements and what the professional *critics* say, not what she says about herself. I suggest that you go through again and try to eliminate all of the above problems before the GA reviewer shows up. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:11, 19 December 2016 (UTC) @Ssilvers: Thank you for the response! Aoba47 (talk) 23:56, 19 December 2016 (UTC) @Ssilvers: Respectfully, I have a few differences of opinions. I honestly do not believe that I can ever find information to satisfy your concern on "why" she did a project. I am honestly not quite sure what that would exactly entail in this context: Why did she pick this specific project? This specific role? I haven't seen much of that sort of information when looking through GAs on similar subject matters so I would greatly appreciate further detail on this. And I added the information about her American Idol cast-mates as I found it relevant to the discussion (as one of the cast-mates was responsible for helping her get on one of the musicals and a majority of the articles I found on her involvement with "Ballroom with a Twist" emphasized the fact that so many American Idol finalists were involved.) This information is limited to two instances that I believe are important so I do not believe it is too repetitive. Also, this is all that I can find of professional critics commenting on her work and I did as much digging I could on the web. This artist is not necessarily a ground-breaking singer/actor and I believe that I have include as much information about her career and career achievement as I possibly could given the subject. I do not have the inclination to search through the newspaper archives at a library for the chances of finding few additional works on here. I agree that this would be necessary if I wanted to make into an FA, but I believe that I have added enough critical reviews to justify it being a good article in the future (which is obviously up to the GA reviewer though that will take a while given the GAN backlog). Aoba47 (talk) 01:00, 27 December 2016 (UTC) @Ssilvers: I hope that I do not come across as rude as I greatly appreciate your feedback. I agree that this is not up to the level of a GA after reading through it. I have put it up for a peer review and even though I would ideally like to get this to the point of a GA, I do not know if I will be able to do that and will just be happy to make this article as strong as it can so hopefully a more capable editor/user can bring it up to that level. Thank you again for your comments. Aoba47 (talk) 14:29, 23 January 2017 (UTC) No, you are very congenial, and I was happy to help (although I cannot spend that much time on this topic). The peer review should help you, even if it does not quite get the article to GA. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:23, 23 January 2017 (UTC) Thank you! After looking at this article with a new set of eyes, I better understand the flaws in the article. I think I will shift my goal for the peer review to just cleaning up the article and making it the best it can possibly be, so that more experienced users may pick up where I left off and do more with it. I do not think GA is a feasible goal, primarily because I will not have the time to do the extensive library/newspaper research required to get more critical background and reception into the article (and that is something this is severely lacking at the moment). Thank you for your help on the peer review and for your edits! Aoba47 (talk) 20:09, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

• @Ssilvers: Hello again. I just wanted to let you know that I have partially taken your advice suggest above. I have combed through all of the local newspapers that I could locate online, and have added all of the relevant information to the article. Unfortunately, a majority of the articles primarily focused either on her time on American Idol (even when the article was about a musical/play) or just listed her as part of the production. I am not certainly if this would be able to pass a GA review in its current state, but this is the best that I can do at the moment. I just thought I would update you, as you have helped me a great deal with this with your feedback in the past. I hope that you are having a great week so far. Thank you again. Aoba47 (talk) 14:25, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

This is much improved. Well done! I have gone through it and made many copy edits to streamline the text and remove some repetition, trivia and self-serving information. The main issues with the article now, I think, are that some of the sources are self-written bios, and many of the sources are archived on the wayback machine. You should search for the titles of those articles to see if they have, perhaps, simply had their original urls changed to a different address that is currently available on google. I don't know if either of these sourcing problems would prevent the from getting promoted to GA. Good luck! -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:46, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

• Thank you for your help and your encouragement; your copy-edit improved the article a great deal. I will definitely look further into the references/sources and the hidden questions that you have included in the article itself. It is actually really cool to see this coming together! I hope that you are having a wonderful day so far. Aoba47 (talk) 21:53, 16 August 2017 (UTC)