Wikipedia:Peer review/Paul Kelly (musician)/archive1

Paul Kelly (musician)
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I believe that the article is ready for an WP:FAC nomination. In order to ensure that it is suitable FA material I'm submitting it for a peer review, just in case either Shaidar cuebiyar or I have missed anything. It is already a GA. Thanks, Dan arndt (talk) 03:50, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

"Note: Peer review is backlogged at the moment, which could mean delays of up to two weeks before articles can be reviewed. You can help, by choosing one of the articles in the backlog, and reviewing it. Please consider doing this."

This is obviously a well researched article; I'm very impressed with the variety of sources used, as well as with the long-standing collaboration. Well done. :) If your goal is FA, you'll be needing some nitpicky fixes before you enter the fray:
 * Technical comments from Maria
 * Paul Maurice Kelly (born 13 January 1955 in Adelaide, South Australia) -- per MOS:BIO, the place of birth should not be included here. Also, remove the bolding from his band names per WP:BOLD.
 * Done by--shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 22:31, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


 * The lead seems somewhat long overall; consider trimming some of the unnecessary as described at WP:LEAD.
 * Found this to be the most difficult task. I've tried trimming it down to about 600 words and hope that this is sufficient.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 00:12, 15 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Blockquotes ( as used in the article) are only for quotations that are longer than three lines; many of the quotes throughout the article should therefore not be in blockquote style.  Integrate them into the text, and remove the attribution to Kelly in the places where it is clear that the quote is from him.  Here's one example from the "1974–1984: Early career and with the Dots" section: "...although in an interview with Drum Media he recalled writing his first unpublished song: 'It was an open-tuning and had four lines about catching trains. I have got a recording of it somewhere. It was called "Catching a Train". I wrote a lot of songs about trains early on, trains and fires, and then I moved onto water'."  Because the quote is introduced as coming from him, there's no reason to attribute it twice.
 * Done by--shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 22:31, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


 * For Doyle's ref ("Chapter Ten: Deeper Water"), consider listing the specific page numbers used. Yes, the full ref states that the pages utilized come from pp. 113–127 of the book, but it would be far more helpful for readers to know the specific pages where they can find the cited information.  Listing page numbers is suggested at WP:CITE.
 * Done by--shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 22:31, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


 * The images may unfortunately give you issues at FAC; I'm not an expert by any means, but there are several users who do nothing but comment upon free vs. fair use images, rationales listed, copyright issues, blah, blah, blah. Some specifics:
 * File:PaulKellyLongBay.jpg: can more information be given about how it was released into the public domain? The description/copyright info is skimpy.  It's of poor quality anyway, so consider if it's truly necessary in the first place.
 * I've contacted the original uploader and provided more information on the image page. It provides a photo of Kelly with his best known line-up of the Coloured Girls in a unique location.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 00:12, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * File:OneNightTheMoon still1.jpg: fair use images, such as this one, need to prove that they are integral to understanding of the article's subject matter. Can the fair use description be strengthened to explain its importance to Kelly's article? (Especially since there is already a free image of him available.)
 * I've added information to the description regarding its use in the Paul Kelly article. It shows Kelly with his wife and daughter in an acting role which is discussed in the main text.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 00:12, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I hope these nitpicky suggestions help; the FAC lot is a nitpicky bunch, after all. :) I haven't read the article in its entirety, but it does appear quite good.  Perhaps consider filing for a copy-edit or two before attempting FAC; WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors may be useful, especially since they are beginning backlog elimination project soon.  Best of luck, María ( habla  con migo ) 02:00, 27 April 2010 (UTC) Good job so far guys. I couldn't see much wrong with it but agree that it might be worth getting a copyedit before taking it to FAC as it can always help to get other eyes on it. As that's not my strong point, I'll just mention a couple of things I noticed.
 * Few comments from Belovedfreak
 * Dan has already popped it on the Copy Editors page.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 00:40, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Some of these you may not agree with, but something to think about.
 * I think there is some overlinking going on. There is a lot of blue in some parts. This is inevitable I think in a pop-culture article, with so many titles and people's names to link, and many of the links are necessary. Because of that, I think it's especially important to make sure that every link is necessary and adds something to the understanding of the topic. The first sentence is quite link-dense for example. "Rock music" is linked, and then "rock" is linked again very shortly after. I see that the second one in fact links to rock and roll, which is slightly misleading. Some other examples of words that may not need to be linked:
 * tribute
 * South Australia (arguably, since it directly follows Adelaide which will itself discuss South Australia)
 * lawyer
 * Argentine
 * Italian
 * guitar (couple of times)
 * vocals
 * cover (version)
 * public relations
 * soundtrack


 * Agree with all your points. Links not needed. Done by--shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 00:40, 2 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Is there a reason for the external link in the 2000–current section? Also, it sounds a little strange describing what he/they do in the clip available rather than describing what he/they do in the film.


 * mea culpa—I was trying acknowledge the screenshot in the article: but this should be done on the image's page. I've re-jigged the sentence: hopefully its more about the artist(s). Done by--shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 00:40, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's better.-- Beloved Freak  17:18, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Hope this helps, good luck with getting it to FAC.-- Beloved Freak  21:03, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Very helpful.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 00:40, 2 May 2010 (UTC)