Wikipedia:Peer review/The Circus Starring Britney Spears/archive1

The Circus Starring Britney Spears
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I nominated it a few weeks ago for GA and it was failed throughout the process. Thanks, Xwomanizerx (talk) 23:16, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

-- Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 15:44, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments by David Fuchs
 * Well, the biggest issue at GAN was prose, so really once other issues are gelled getting the WP:LOCE or somebody to run through it would be best (I'll try, but I don't have much wiki-time these days so I'm not sure if I'll get to it.)
 * Anyhow, I'm concerned about using multiple references to prove an assertion. For example, "The performance received worldwide attention which exceeded expectations. Her singing, her dancing and even her wardrobe were all commented on extensively, and it was considered hurtful for her career." That first sentence is unsourced. The second sentence is sourced to three sources from the time, . The sources are reliable, but I'm concerned that they are more the opinions of the authors than stated fact, and it would be erroneous to use them to assert a blanket statement; perhaps more recent sources looking back at the performance would be better. This is an issue I see a couple of other times on first glance ("After its premiere performance, the tour tour received generally positive reviews from several critics" is better, but it might be better to be a little less committed than this.)
 * The article could do with a trim; not that it's too long an article, but because similar details crowd together and turn the article into a morass of repetitive phrasing in places. Take the background section, for example. I count ten instances of "In [MONTH/DATE], [YEAR]" phrasing. This feels like a current events story coming together, but we've got hindsight working for us now. Not all these details are necessary, and you can combine and synthesize some summaries to cut down on the looping feeling.
 * There are lots of curly quotes in the article (“, ’, etc.) These should all be converted to straight quotes (", ') per WP:PUNCT.
 * I'm concerned about undue weight given to altercations and controversies (around 10 paragraphs and four dedicated subsections.) Condense this stuff to bare details and merge it back into the rest of the article where relevant, or give it a paragraph at the end of the tour section describing difficulties on the road or whatnot.
 * There's a lot of free images of the show—great. The problem is that sometimes there seem to be too many, in that barely-related images are put in a section because they won't fit elsewhere. You've got a commons link at the end of the article—I suggest judiciously pruning images.