Talk:Wanda Jackson/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ezlev (talk · contribs) 00:03, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

I'll be reviewing this fascinating article! I've created two subsections below, one for {{GAProgress}} as an overview of the review's status and one for specific points to be raised and discussed. Any broader discussion can take place up here. Looking forward to working with you, ChrisTofu11961! ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 00:03, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

I've done a preliminary review below, and I'll now put this on hold to await responses. Overall, this is looking good! ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs)

@Ezlev: Hello! Thank you for your feedback. I went back and made changes based on your suggestions. See below. ChrisTofu11961 (talk) 17:57, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Nicely done, ChrisTofu11961! I've added one new note to you about a verifiability issue, and then I've got some work to do – reading back through the article and that sort of thing. We're headed in the right direction! ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 18:15, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Okay, ChrisTofu11961, just one minor question to resolve (at the bottom of the Prose list below) and then I believe this will meet the GA criteria! ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 03:39, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

@Ezlev: I think this should meet your needs now (see prose below). ChrisTofu11961 (talk) 04:44, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Passing! Great work, ChrisTofu11961, and congratulations! ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 05:12, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

@Ezlev: Thank you so much for reviewing! ChrisTofu11961 (talk) 05:24, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Progress

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Notes

Well written

Prose: I've made some copyedits to the article, which has high-quality and clear prose overall. I'll make a final proofreading pass at some point. Notes:

• References to Jackson's later recollections are sprinkled throughout the article, and in a number of cases it's not clear that she recalled these things later (i.e. in her autobiography) rather than at the time of the event being described. Clarifying these instances would be good.
  • Makes sense. I went back and clarified.
    •  Done
• Note to self (reviewer): make another read-through
  •  Done
• In the second paragraph of Early life: "While in the fifth grade, she started going by her first name, Wanda." This is confusing. What did she go by previously? Why is this significant? Can it be removed?
  • It doesn't make sense, you're right. I removed it.
    •  Done

MOS:

• The lede is strong, but the first paragraph could stand to be broadened a bit with more details about her activity and prominence.
  • A fair point. I added more to this paragraph to clarify the types of music Jackson has been know for.
    •  Done
• Citations in the lede, with the exception of the one supporting "The Queen of Rockabilly", should be moved into the body if possible. This should be simple since the content they support should also appear in the body.
  • I moved the citations under the "influence" section. ChrisTofu11961 (talk) 17:57, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
    •  Done
• Layout looks good!
• There seem to be some charged terms used in the article, like (from the lede) "Jackson reverted to the country genre" and "re-discovering Christianity". These should be swapped for more neutral alternatives.
  • I changed these terms to make them more neutral and went through some more terms that I noticed. If there any I missed, please change them.
    •  Done
• Lists look good!

Verifiable

Reference style: A-OK Reliable sources:

• I'm not very familiar with the reliability of AllMusic. Can you justify its extensive use here?
  • Sure. AllMusic is a website that provides comprehensive information about performers. Its reliable because the biography in which I took this from was written by a music historian, Kurt Wolff. Other biographies on this website are written by music journalists, writers and historians. Among the most popular is Stephen Thomas Erlewine. Many other "GA" articles on Wikipedia use AllMusic due to its reliability.
    • Ok, I'm satisfied with that.
• Note to self (reviewer): double-check appropriate use of autobio per WP:BLPSELFPUB
  •  Done
• In the lede, "She was among the first women to have a career in rock and roll" doesn't appear to have a source.
  • Never mind, found it in the body

No original research: Looks good! Free of copyvio: Song titles lead to high Earwig percentage, but looks alright

Broad

Addresses main aspects: It sure does! Stays focused: Good as far as I'm concerned

Neutral

Appears so, but I'll check in more detail later

• After some wording tweaks, I believe it is!

Stable

Absolutely!

Illustrated

Beautiful selection of images. I'll admit to a bit of trepidation about the no-copyright-notice rationale because it can be difficult to verify, but all the images here appear legitimately free on the surface, and I verified a random selection. I'm willing to assume good fait that the information in Commons for the rest is truthful.