Talk:Jackie Evancho/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs) 09:51, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Reception and reputation

Isn't it odd that everything the article has to say about her musicianship is positive, that most such praise does not come from the classically trained, and that whatever bit may indeed be written by the literate seems to consist of phrases taken out of context (e.g., that SFGate review)?

At least there should be some balance:

Feketekave (talk) 01:35, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The NY Times article linked to above is already cited in Evancho's article. The third link above is a blog that is not a WP:Reliable source, and the quality of it, I think, speaks for itself. The LA Times article is by Marcia Adair, whose opinions about Evancho are cited elsewhere in the article. I believe that the discussion of the reception of Evancho, her albums and her tour performances represents a good balance of the actual reception that she has received in WP:Reliable sources. I have read nearly all of the major-media articles about Evancho: the great majority are positive, and of the few articles that could be called negative, most are cited to in this article. Also, I think that the statement above is simply wrong: the positive statements made about Evancho's technique or musicianship are either from conductors, opera company administrators, voice teachers or credentialled critics. [Added later: Evancho's entry omits lots of sources filled with effusive praise, such as this one, this one and this one, and it generally avoids the praise that has repeatedly and universally been bestowed by people who are interviewing Evancho live or about to present a performance of hers]. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:06, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have checked the references to both the NY Times article and to the other piece by Marcia Adair. Contrary to the statement above, Adair's opinions are never referred to in the article. As for the NY Times - a statement that can be interpreted as mixed or mildly positive has been cherry-picked from an article whose overall judgement is very different:

"Ms. Evancho is a child. You wouldn’t insult a child, would you?

Of course not. So children, Ms. Evancho included: cover your ears and eyes.

Precocity is a shock, a fascination and a curse. Ms. Evancho has an unusual talent, but an undeveloped one. She ::has a clear and sometimes moving tone, but with almost no muscle beneath it, and with only the faintest capacity ::for interpretation."

A fair summary would include statements such as this. Feketekave (talk) 09:07, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Times reviewer, Jon Caramanica, did not even know where he was. As a correction at the bottom of the review notes, the first version of the review stated that the concert took place at Alice Tully Hall when, in fact, it took place at Avery Fisher Hall. His article contained other factual errors, including misattributing the author of a song. Norman Lebrecht noted that Caramanica is not a classical music reviewer and asked why, given that Evancho topped the classical charts in 2011, no classical music critic reported on the concert. See "Why did no classical critic review Jackie’s Avery Fisher debut?", Slipped Disc, Arts Journal, November 9, 2011. Caramanica criticized such irrelevancies as the non-Evancho introductory selections played by the orchestra, and even criticized the age of the audience at Avery Fisher Hall (the same age as one would typically find at Avery Fisher for such concerts). Plus, the concert was a sell-out, according to the box office, notwithstanding Caramanica's pointed mention of a few seats where the ticket-holders did not show up. [Later edit: In July 2012, the "Public Editor" of the Times, Arthur Brisbane, discussed the review in an article about readers' objections to certain reviews. He wrote that readers "especially object when a critic tramples on the dignity of an artist or performer, as occasionally happens. ... Last November, a number of readers protested a dismissive review of the 11-year-old singing prodigy Jackie Evancho, with one calling it 'the journalistic equivalent of a drive-by shooting.'"] So I don't think it's important or useful to note that Caramanica thinks that "Precocity is a shock, a fascination and a curse". The article now contains the most balanced quote from the article, where he says that he liked the 2nd half of the concert more than the first. -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:28, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tomcat7 comments

Ok, skipping the large discussion above I will start to review the article.

"She attended Eden Hall Upper Elementary School from 2009 to 2010,[9] but since she began to tour and record, she is cyber schooled.[8][10] " - a bit boring prose, eg three times "she". How about something like "Initially attending ..., Evancho is now cyber-schooled..."--Tomcat (7) 18:15, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:59, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will also skip the prose for now. A major issue is the excessive usage of in-line citations. Apart from the lead there is nearly no sentence without a citation. However, the article curiously have material unreferenced, eg "She also appeared briefly as an extra in the 2010 film She's Out of My League. Her first featured television appearance was in the episode "Back To Max" of the final season of the Disney Channel series Wizards of Waverly Place (2011) singing "America the Beautiful" in Tribeca Prep's "Spirit of America Play" and asking Mr. Laritate if her performance was sufficient to "work off" detention."--Tomcat (7) 18:15, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The information in this article is frequently challenged, and Evancho is a living person, so it is necessary to reference it all (please see this). I have now referenced "She's Out of My League" and "Back to Max". -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:59, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another issue is the reliability of many sources. I see Youtube, blogs, amazon, walmart, etc. Also many deadlinks and inconsistent reference style.--Tomcat (7) 18:15, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed all of the YouTube sources. References to commercial sources like Amazon and Walmart are used only to show the details of the album's sales, such as release dates. I believe that each of these is permitted by WP:RS for the purposes cited. However, feel free to point out any that you think are inappropriate, and we can discuss them. I have also updated some dead links. Of course, updating dead links is an ongoing process, as links age. If you see any more dead links, please let me know, and I will update them. Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:59, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The prose is in cases essay-like and biased. You use many redundant, weasely words, some of which I removed for clarification. The article contains information that does not belong into a biography about the singer. For example you include album reviews or commentaries.--Tomcat (7) 18:15, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with your deletion of the words "ever" or "in history". These were not just 2010 or 2011 records; the words are needed to clarify that the record was an all-time record. If you see any WP:WEASEL words, please point them out. What is your objection to the inclusion of major reviews of this artist? If you look at FAs of artists, I think you will see reviews of their work are included. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:59, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"inspiring anthems " - meaningless to me.

Changed to "inspirational" anthems. Maybe that's redundant, because the type of songs that are referred to as "anthems" and are probably all supposed to be "inspriational" (tending to arouse inspiration; inspiring). I suppose it could be just "anthems". -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:22, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Change the publisher of all Billboard sites to Prometheus Global Media

Done. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:22, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-English sources, eg 146, should have the language parameter

Done. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:22, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 79, Tv.com, should be replaced

Done. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:22, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 78, wtae.com, is dead

Fixed. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:22, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Same for 116 and 162

Fixed. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:22, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 132 redirects to the home page

Fixed. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:22, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 136 leads to a page with some videos--Tomcat (7) 10:41, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:22, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the copy edits and note review. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:22, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will promote this article. The references may need a clean-up and Moxy's comment should be regarded. Overall I believe it meets the criteria. Regards.--Tomcat (7) 20:44, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your help, Tomcat. I did not nominate this article for GA, but I'm delighted. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:45, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]