Talk:Siouxsie Sioux/GA2

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

Reviewer: Retrohead (talk · contribs) 12:58, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

I saw a more detailed review was required for this article, so I'll post it shortly.--Retrohead (talk) 12:58, 4 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Prose
 * What does "splinter group" means? Something like her side project, or an offshoot of the original group?
 * Released would be a better fit over produced. Also, a string of "hit singles" is vague assentation. It can be either a number 1 song, high-selling record, or fan-favorite.
 * Generally, the lead should summarize the article's body, thus references are not necessarily needed, unless they support some controversial or disputed information.
 * If you quote "one of the most influential British singers of the rock era", the publication is also required.
 * "a wide range of other artists including"→"artists such as"
 * I think Central London can safely be omitted.
 * Constructions such as "10 years separate her from her elder brother and sister" are considered verbose. Ten years younger than her two siblings would be much better.
 * Why are "seriously sexually assaulted" and "totally ignored" in quote marks? Are you suggesting the event was magnified by the media or you're indicating that it did not actually happen? (scare quotes)
 * "prematurely" and "first" are extra (3rd paragraph)
 * "the string of students" is an awkward wording; perhaps "group" would suit better
 * From the first sentence in the second section, I'd conclude that Siouxsie and the Banshees were consisted of Siouxsie and the bass guitarist? Not true, I suppose.
 * It's written that "Hong Kong Garden" was depicted by critics... All I see is one critic.
 * The cite about Nick Kent from NME goes at the end of the quote.
 * change in musical direction; also, who considered McGeoch "one of the most innovative and influential guitarists of the past 30 years"?
 * Why are so many one-sentence paragraphs in the third and fourth section?
 * Overall, the biography text section doesn't have fluidity. It is plain chronology, with all those dates and publications listed.
 * If two rappers covered her songs, that doesn't mean she influenced them greatly. Unless this is sourced, it constitutes original research. Covered should be de-linked.
 * Personal life is not fully covered. Information whether she had kids, reason for divorce are not stated.
 * Closing note: I found this article needs serious work to reach GA status, and the usual seven day span certainly won't be enough. I also noticed that the nominator, Avario87, hasn't been active in the last two months, so it's not likely that I'll receive a swift response. When the notes are addressed, feel free to re-nominate the article. I'm closing it as failed.--Retrohead (talk) 21:22, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Request for reconsideration
Retrohead, Carliertwo has been active in the article lately, and just had the dismaying experience of dealing with now-indeffed PapaJeckloy as the GAN reviewer in the GA1, before the review was taken away from him and the nomination put back in pool. (PapaJeckloy was indefinitely blocked a couple of days ago for sockpuppeting and other disruptive activities.) Since the article had taken six months to get to the point of being reviewed, I was wondering whether you'd be willing to give this another chance—in particular, to give Carliertwo the opportunity to give you that swift response you were hoping for, and to work on the issues you've raised above. Thank you for your consideration. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:20, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
 * He can address the notes and re–nominate the article. I promise to take another look right after he's done. My point was even if I put the article on hold for a week, it still won't be enough because it needs to be re-written from scratch. By seeing his edit history, he was editing Wikipedia only three days in August, and I seriously doubt he will return on time. Sorry.--Retrohead (talk) 05:59, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, and thanks. If the article needs that much work, then there isn't much point in putting it on hold, and the offer to review once the rewrite is done and the article renominated is quite generous. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:08, 5 September 2014 (UTC)