Wikipedia:Peer review/Beyoncé Knowles discography/archive2

Beyoncé Knowles discography
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because last time it failed is FLC. There were too many issues with the article. Please help. If something familiar with singers' discographies could leave a very nice review, i would be very happy.
 * Previous peer review

Thanks, ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 10:17, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: I am not super knowledgable about discographies, but here are some suggestions for improvement. Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 18:38, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * First thing I would do is look very carefulley at the failed FLC comments and see if they have all been addressed. Treat that like a very detailed review (which it is) and make sure everything that was objected to before is fixed. Once you are sure all the i's have been dotted and all the t's crossed, I would perhaps ask the editors who opposed before to check the article again and see if their issues had been addressed or not (I would do this one at a time). If not, fix and repeat.
 * There are many FLs which are discographies. I would pick some recent ones and use them as models for this to get ideas and examples to follow.
 * The external link checker tool says that there are 3 dead links
 * As far as I can tell, the list part is OK (with one question - see below). The references also appear to be OK, though again I am not an expert in music articles (so I assume these are reliable sources).
 * The one question I had was the karaoke album - I believe that Beyonce only sings (and does not play intsruments) on her records. If her voice has been removed for the karaoke album, how can it be hers for inclusion here?
 * The rest of my comments will be on the lead. The first sentence does not follow WP:LEAD which says in part The article should begin with a declarative sentence telling the nonspecialist reader what (or who) is the subject. The problem is that the article is about the albums and songs Beyonce has done as a solo artist, however the current first sentence is about Beyonce the singer as a member of Destiny's Child, and does not have anything to do with her solo work. The current second sentence would be a much better first sentence (tweaked).
 * Sewcond sentence says Her discography as a solo artist began in 2003... but there are three songs on the discography that pre-date 2003
 * Avoid needless repetition - having said All of her studio albums won the Grammy Award for Best Contemporary R&B Album,[2] and debuted at the number one spot on the United States Billboard 200.[3] there is no need to repeat the number one debut in the lead.
 * Unless I am mistaken, the preceding sentence is in error, as 4 has not earned that particluar Grammy (and since that Grammy was discontinued after 2011, cannot earn it ever).
 * In general, it would help to qualify general statements - so ...Destiny's Child, which has sold around fifty million records worldwide. could be clarified by adding the year (as of 2010). Or above something like Her first three studio albums won the Grammy Award for Best Contemporary R&B Album,[2] and all four debuted at the number one spot on the United States Billboard 200.[3]'' would be clearer.
 * "attained" sounds odd - I do not think an artist attains number ones or certifications - look at model FLs and see what verbs they use
 * My rule of thumb for the lead of an article is to include every section in some way - there is no mention of charity singles that I can see in the lead. I also see that many of the other section headers are mentioned only in the second sentence - this may be a WP:WEIGHT issue.
 * I would make sure the focus is on the albums / singles / songs as much as possible - the article seems to veer a little too much into awards and other extraneous matters.
 * Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)