Talk:Gwyneth Herbert/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Winner 42 (talk · contribs) 20:37, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Beginning review, looks solid at a glance, will be done in a day or two. Winner 42 Talk to me!  20:37, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Just noticed that you have addressed some of these things while I was reviewing, I apologize for being too lazy to go back and check what you have fixed. Winner 42  Talk to me!  22:11, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * B. Cites reliable sources, where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused (see summary style):
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

Overall Comments

 * There are currently nine dead links in the article
 * This article seems to be largely comprised of positive reviews, some negative ones should be added to provide due weight to those critics
 * You need commas after introductory clauses with dates
 * More images would be nice if possible, but I won't fail this if no more are available.

Sectional Analysis

 * Lead
 * The section seems not to summarize the points made in the article per WP:MOSLEAD and instead is largely positive quotes
 * now established -> now is established


 * Band
 * Does this need its own section or could it be merged with career?
 * The other people in the band will need to be sourced besides Dave Price


 * Early life and education
 * The second sentence is not in chronological order
 * Noticing a bit of WP:CITEKILL here with ref 8


 * Professional career
 * Poland doesn't need a link
 * "who was shortly to judge" Poor wording/grammar
 * "This comprised mainly standards" Poor wording or jargon, can't tell what this is supposed to mean


 * Other work
 * These subsections don't seem to flow well, consider paragraphs?
 * Some of these seem to only be sourced to primary sources, such as her appearance on Music Matters

Comments on review
Thank you for completing this review so quickly and thoroughly, Winner 42 (talk). You've given me some useful pointers for improving the article.

I've addressed most of your concerns. Specifically:
 * I've sourced new references to replace most of the dead links. In a couple of cases I've simply deleted the dead link to avoid over-citation.
 * I've edited the lead para, although it probably still needs further work
 * I've combined the quotes about Herbert's singing style with the text on the band (which I've now referenced). I've put them into a new section called "Performance"
 * I've addressed the other concerns in your sectional analysis.

I think it will be challenging to find some negative quotes about her performance. The only negative quotes I can recall seeing refer to her musical The A-Z of Mrs P, which received mixed reviews from the critics. Almost all this criticism was directed at the play rather than the music itself.

I took the picture that accompanies the article, as I couldn't find any elsewhere. It was the only one I took that is of publishable quality.

Best wishes. Headhitter (talk) 09:14, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Ok it looks good now. I'll go ahead and pass it. Congrats! Winner 42 Talk to me!  16:36, 5 July 2015 (UTC)