Talk:Frank Sinatra/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 13:59, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Despite being on a break from Wikipedia, I'm a man of my word and look forward to giving this a comprehensive review. I'll start my initial read through now JAGUAR 13:59, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Initial comments

Lead

"he began his musical career in the swing era as a boy singer" - is "boy singer" the correct term to use here? I was thinking something like child singer, but I'll leave that up to you

I've removed it as I don't think we need to state the obvious!

"His career was reborn in 1953" - how about regained?

Mm not sure, I think reborn is OK, several biographies use "reborn" I think.

The alternative is "resurrected," but IMHO, that might be a bit hyperbolic... ;-)

"with the success of From Here to Eternity and subsequent Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor win" - and his subsequent Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor win

Indeed.

"scoring a Top 40 hit with" - this could be linked to Top 40, or is it American Top 40?

I'm not American, not sure! I'm more aware of the Billboard one, I'll link the American one but Americans among us might check on that.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:51, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I linked to Top 40 - "American Top 40" is a program, not sure if they do their own rankings or pull from Billboard. Montanabw ^(talk) 21:08, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Sinatra forged a highly successful career as a film actor" - I know this is saying that his films were commercially successful however the lead never tells how Sinatra's performances as an actor were received? The opening of the film career section states that "he was rarely enthusiastic towards his own acting, once remarking that "pictures stink""?

Eeks, I can't really go into the reception of his films in the lede, except his awards, there's a lot to get through!

I think the lead is perfect on both terms of quality and length. WP:LEADLENGTH states that articles with over 30,000 characters should have three to four paragraphs, so there's nothing to worry about regarding length here.

Body

"and Antonino Martino "Marty" Sinatra, the son of grape growers, from Lercara Friddi, near Palermo" - no need for comma between "growers" and "from"

Indeed.

"Barbara Sinatra claims that Dolly was abusive to him as a kid" - informal, use child

Changed.

"Sinatra spent much time at his parent's tavern in Hoboken" - should be parents' (only if both of them lived there)

OK

"Dorsey recalled: You could almost feel the excitement" - missing quotation mark

Well spotted!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:03, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Sinatra signed with Columbia as a solo artist on June 1" - on which year?

I thought it was OK to follow on from the 1943 above but at I mention the 42-44 strike too you're quite right in reading it that it needs to be given.

"Despite being heavily involved in political activity in 1945 and 1946, in those two years Sinatra "sang on 160 radio shows, completed thirty-six recording sessions, and made four movies"." - why is this used in quotes? To me it could read fine without them

OK. done.

"By the end of 1948, Sinatra had slipped to No. 4" - number four?

Fourth will do

"he death of publicist George Evans from a heart attack in January 1950 at just 48" - remove "just"

Done.

"his marriage had long been over even before he'd met Gardner" - he had

Done.

"Sinatra became one of Las Vegas's pioneer entertainers; Biographer Arnold Shaw" - Biographer shouldn't be capitalised after a semi colon

Very well spotted!

"Also that year, Sinatra sang at Democrat convention" - the Democrat convention? Sounds a little vague

I've linked 1956 Democratic National Convention.

"but it remained in the UK charts for 122 weeks, including 75 non-consecutive weeks in the Top Forty" - Top 40?

Linked.

"Despite his heavy New Jersey accent" - you could link Mid-Atlantic American English here

I'm not sure it really is though, his accent was more working class than upper class? I'd rather not I think unless we have an article on New Jersey accent, New York accent would be closer.

"Sinatra's split with Gardner in the fall of 1953" - autumn?

It's an American article, that's OK I think.

"Sinatra tried to break into Hollywood in the early 1940s" - I think this sounds a tad informal. Might sound better as something like Sinatra attempted to persue an acting career into Hollywood in the early 1940s or something similar?

Mm, maybe tad, OK changed to "Sinatra attempted to pursue an acting career in Hollywood in the early 1940s"

"When Sinatra acquired a job as a singing waiter at "The Rustic Cabin" in Englewood Cliffs New Jersey" - missing comma between "Cliffs" and "New Jersey"
"The couple married at Sunnylands" - any idea which state this estate is in?

Linked, pleasantly surprised we have the article

"Sinatra commented that if it hadn't been for his interest in music he'd "probably have ended in a life of crime"" - he would, as this isn't in quotes

OK.

"and spoofed by Joe Piscopo and Phil Hartman on Saturday Night Live.{" - typo

A bad attempt at a moustache!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:25, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

Ref 524 (Postal service to immortalize...) and ref 526 (Frank Sinatra's contribution...) are dead. These most likely could be archived

@Ssven2: You're the archiving master!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:26, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are numerous harv ref errors in the Sources section

Pending..

On hold

This is an article of impeccable quality. It is overall comprehensive and well written throughout. I think the harv ref errors need to be dealt with before FAC, and Ssven mentioned a few references that were lacking page numbers. I also spotted a few minor prose issues as well as a couple of informalities, but other than that this is looking like FA material. Length of the article can be something to talk about in the future peer review/FAC, but it's not a problem for the GA criteria, which it practically meets. JAGUAR 16:19, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers Jaguar, yes I intend to give it a trim and copyedit/polish. I'm still going through the Granata book which seems to be an excellent insight into his musical career so might be able to pad some of the albums out with info before filing it down. I might be able to lose 1000 words, but the length is comparable to the Reagan FA article. It's difficult to be comprehensive on Sinatra without it being large, it's always going to be a very long biography because of all the assets to his life and career, but I don't honestly believe that any one section of the article comes across excessive in length overall, though the whole thing together I think is currently too long for most palettes.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:48, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I gave the length a check and it's currently 81 kB of "Readable prose", 3kB less than Reagan's article, so it's quite alright IMO. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 01:45, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both for addressing the comments! This definitely meets the GA criteria, and is close to meeting the FA criteria already. I think the length is fine and more content could be added, as long as it's absolutely necessary. He is considered to be the greatest singer of the 20th century after all!

JAGUAR 13:31, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mmm 81 is not too bad, I mean it was 115kb at one stage. It's OK for GA, Gary Cooper was much larger at once stage too. But I did agree with Loeba on about 12,000 words and I think it's its in high 13,000s range which is too big to be honest. No article really should be over 10,000 words, but I do think for somebody like Sinatra to really do him justice it's got to be longer and it's what readers will understand and expect. I think I need to knock off about 1000 words but I'll see how it goes, I've still got Granata to go through to it might hit 14,000 odd before I come to chop again.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:07, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Guest comment by Ssven2

Regarding the references, As of this version of the article, reference numbers 11, 165, 168, 300, 307, 378 and 421 don't have page numbers. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:31, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ssven2 I think some of those are e books which don't have page numbers. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:43, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 11, replaced Done
Refs 165. 168 -O'brien is an ebook, no number
Ref 300, replaced Done
Ref 378, Done
Ref 421, O'Brien e book

Reference 307 is now 309. Fixed it myself. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 01:38, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]