Jump to content

Wikipedia:Peer review/Janet Jackson/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Janet Jackson

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…it is very close to meeting Featured Article criteria. I'd like this peer review to work as a "mock" FAC; I would ask any editor who chooses to review this article as if it were currently in FAC and hold it according to the following criteria:

A featured article exemplifies our very best work and features professional standards of writing and presentation. In addition to meeting the requirements for all Wikipedia articles, it has the following attributes.

  1. It is—
    • (a) well-written: its prose is engaging, even brilliant, and of a professional standard;
    • (b) comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details;
    • (c) factually accurate: claims are verifiable against reliable sources, accurately represent the relevant body of published knowledge, and are supported with specific evidence and external citations; this requires a "References" section in which sources are listed, complemented by inline citations where appropriate;
    • (d) neutral: it presents views fairly and without bias; and
    • (e) stable: it is not subject to ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured article process.
  2. It follows the style guidelines, including the provision of:
    • (a) a lead—a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections;
    • (b) appropriate structure—a system of hierarchical headings and a substantial but not overwhelming table of contents (see section help); and
    • (c) consistent citations—where required by Criterion 1c, consistently formatted inline citations using either footnotes[1] or Harvard referencing (Smith 2007, p. 1) (see citing sources for suggestions on formatting references; for articles with footnotes, the meta:cite format is recommended).
  3. Images. It has images and other media where appropriate, with succinct captions and acceptable copyright status. Non-free images or media must satisfy the criteria for inclusion of non-free content and be labeled accordingly.
  4. Length. It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

This way, I can aviod a lenthly FAC and get any major (and even minor) concerns out of the way before nomination. Thanks, The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 02:59, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Comments I'll be listing items as I go through the article.

Comments from Ealdgyth (talk · contribs)

Hope this helps. Please note that I don't watchlist Peer Reviews I've done. If you have a question about something, you'll have to drop a note on my talk page to get my attention. (My watchlist is already WAY too long, adding peer reviews would make things much worse.) 13:18, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

LuciferMorgan

[edit]

Comments;

  • "The record received a poor critical reception, with one critic commenting that Jackson had "no distinctive musical personality of her own".[14]" - According to whom was the record "poorly" received? How an album was received is an opinion, so that opinion needs attribution. Name the critic and publication in question.
  • "Critical reception was considered favorable to that of Jackson's debut album, as her musical style was described as a "prime [example] of pleasing '80s pop".[15]" - According to whom was this album received "favourable" compared to her debut? This is an comparison, so someone has arrived at a conclusion. Who is that person? Also, let me state that just because Allmusic says an album was good, that doesn't mean critics felt that way across the board.
  • "That same year, Jackson eloped with childhood friend and fellow R&B singer James DeBarge; they divorced shortly afterwards and the marriage was subsequently annulled.[8]" - What date did they "elope" (married is a better word), and when did they separate specifically?
  • "After the limited successes of her first two albums, Jackson decided to separate her business affairs from her father and the rest of her family." - According to whom did her first two albums enjoy "limited success"? This is an opinion, but whose?
  • "Within six weeks, Jackson, Jam, and Lewis crafted Jackson's breakthrough album, Control, which was released in February 1986.[17]" - According to whom was this a "breakthrough album"? This is yet another unattributed opinion.
  • "Critics compared Jackson's music favorably to contemporary rivals such as Whitney Houston, Patti LaBelle, and Diana Ross.[19][20]" - Which critics specifically? Name them, and the publication they wrote for. Two critics does not constitute general opinion.
  • "Most of the Control music videos were choreographed by a then unknown-Paula Abdul. "Let's Wait Awhile", which promoted sexual abstinence over promiscuity, earned Jackson a reputation as a role model for young women.[10]" - According to whom did Jackson earn a reputation as a role model? This is merely Steve Huey's opinion, and is in no way a factual statement.
  • "Much like its predecessor, the album contained heavy styling of new jack swing.[21] While Jackson's small voice was criticized and her social agenda garnered mixed reactions, reviews for Rhythm Nation 1814 were predominately positive; critics commented it was an even greater success than Control.[27]" - According to whom did this album contain this? Who believes Jackson's voice was "small", and was criticised etc.? Who believes reception was "predominantly positive"? Who believes it was "an even greater success"? Many opinions are being dressed up as fact, violating criterion 1c.
  • "Unwilling to compromise her artistic integrity, Jackson shifted from "personal freedom to more universal concerns—injustice, illiteracy, crime, drugs—without missing a beat."[27]" - According to whom did this shift occur?
  • "David Hiltbrand People Weekly commented that "Jackson's heart may be in the right place -- she's against all the bad, hurtful stuff in a vague, Tinker Bell sort of way", but asserted her music had not improved from her previous hit album Control.[28]" - The word "of" needs to be inserted after Hiltbrand.
  • "The Rhythm Nation 1814 Tour—Jackson's first world tour in support of a studio album—which aimed to re-create the award–winning, visually innovative music videos of Rhythm Nation 1814 and Control, was described as "an elaborately choreographed spectacle" by Entertainment Weekly.[37]" - "Visually innovative"? Says who?
  • "Routledge International Encyclopedia of Women: Global Women's Issues and Knowledge documented that Jackson's success during this time period placed her on par with several other globally renowned recording artists, including her older brother Michael Jackson, Madonna, and Tina Turner.[40]" - I'm assuming this Routledge book uses the words "globally renowned". For that reason, quotations would be necessary.
  • "The album marked the beginning of Jackson's exploration of sexuality in her music.[46]" - Says who?
  • "The album's number one hit single "That's the Way Love Goes"—winner of the 1994 Grammy Award for Best R&B Song—and the top ten singles "If," "Because of Love," "You Want This" and "Any Time, Any Place" all contained themes of sexual freedom and physical intimacy.[37][49]" - According to? Lyrical interpretations are always subject to opinion.
  • "The album was an introspective look into Jackson's bout with depression, as Michael Saunders of The Boston Globe described it as a "critical self-examination and an audio journal of a woman's road to self-discovery".[12]" - The first part of the sentence saying it's introspective look etc. is a personal interpretation of Saunders review, so can be deemed original research.
  • "The album's title is a literal depiction of the velvet ropes commonly used to separate crowds from celebrities, and according to Jackson, the metaphorical velvet rope within every human being which keeps their true feelings separated from those around them.[66]" - Is the "literal depiction" also from the opinion of Janet Jackson?
  • "Although the album suffered criticism based on Jackson's personal issues with self-esteem, it became one of her most critically acclaimed, as Rolling Stone described The Velvet Rope as "part of a continuum, building from the self-empowering manifesto Control, the skin-deep social consciousness of Rhythm Nation and the hypersexual make-over of Janet".[68]" - According to whom did the album suffer criticism based on her self-esteem issues, and according to whom was it her "one of her most critically acclaimed"? These are conclusions, so who is the person whom has arrived at them? Seems like original research.
  • "In August 1997, the album's lead single, "Got 'Til It's Gone" was released to radio and was moderately successful." - "Moderately successful"? Someone has merely taken a look at the lead single's chart positions, and arrived at their own conclusion. This is more original research.
  • "In 2002, Jackson collaborated with reggae singer Beenie Man on the song "Feel It Boy," which met moderate success." - Whether the song met "moderate success" is personal interpretation.
  • "CBS, the NFL, and MTV (CBS's sister network that produced the halftime show), denied any knowledge and all responsibility of the incident under a hail of criticism." - A "hail of criticism"? Strong words - original research maybe?
  • "Despite the album's strong debut, its three singles all failed to become Top 40 hits.[101]" - "Strong"? Some might see it as weak, given her past success. It's best to stick to the facts - the sentence should start with something like "Despite the album debuting at number two..." or something similar.
  • "By the end of 2004, Damita Jo had sold 942,000 copies in the United States and was later certified platinum by the RIAA, but was considered a commercial disappointment compared to Jackson's previous albums.[101][102]" - According to whom was the album "a commercial disappointment"?
  • "Lackluster sales of Damita Jo have been speculated to be not only a result of negative publicity from the Super Bowl incident, but also due to MTV's "blacklisting" of Jackson's music videos.[103]" - "Lacklustre"? According to whom? Some might see a platinum-certified album as indicating strong sales - it's all subject to opinion, hence the word "lacklustre" being a personal opinion.
  • "Coveney was told Jackson and producers Jimmy Jam, Terry Lewis and Jermaine Dupri focused the album's production to R&B and dance oriented music - the two genres which made her famous.[106]" - Who says these are "the two genres which made her famous"?
  • "Andy Kellman of Allmusic and Chris Willman of Entertainment Weekly asserted 20 Y.O. did not meet the awe inspiring production of its namesake, Control.[118][119]" - Who deemed that Control has "awe inspiring production"? Depends on what the listener prefers in terms of production values.
  • "Though Discipline was widely expected to be Jackson's "comeback" album—similar to Mary J. Blige's The Breakthrough and Mariah Carey's The Emancipation of Mimi—Jackson has asserted that she has never stopped making music, and therefore, talks of a 'comeback' were misguided.[135]" - "Widely expected"? By whom exactly?
  • "Jackson's voice has been classified as mezzo-soprano, though the singer has been noted for having a limited vocal range.[139][46]" - By whom?
  • "David Ritz of Rolling Stone compares Jackson's musical style to that of Marvin Gaye; Jackson, much like Gaye, has relied heavily on personal experience as the source of her music.[141]" - Where are the quotation marks?
  • "Other artists attributed as influences on Jackson's music are The Ronettes, Dionne Warwick, Tammi Terrell and Diana Ross.[142]" - Attributed by whom?
  • "Jackson's crossover appeal in both R&B and popular music has been documented as one of her advantages, as Teresa Wiltz of The Washington Post observed "Janet Jackson...regularly leap[s] from urban to Top 40".[143]" - Is the first half of the sentence Wiltz's opinion, or personal reflection? This needs to be made clear if its Wiltz'.
  • "Richard J. Ripani documented Jackson's music has been considered to be crucial to the development of R&B, as Jackson and her producers "crafted a new sound that fuses the rhythmic elements of funk and disco, along with heavy doses of synthesizers, percussion, sound effects and a rap music sensibility".[21]" - The same problem as the last excerpt. Its better to merely quote what a critic has noted, as opposed to making a personal observation prior to the quote. If it isn't personal observation, make that clear.
  • "Jackson's concert performances have been compared to Broadway productions and have been referred to as "enormous theatrical extravaganza[s]" and the "pop equivalent of a summer blockbuster movie".[147][148]" - By whom?
  • "With a career in dance music which spans two decades, Jackson's choreography has been credited for setting the benchmark for a number of contemporary artists.[150][111][151]" - By whom?
  • "Steve Huey asserted despite being born into a family of entertainers, Janet Jackson has managed to establish her unique impact on the recording industry—rivaling not only several female entertainers including Madonna, Mariah Carey and Whitney Houston, but also her brother—while "successfully [shifting] her image from a strong, independent young woman to a sexy, mature adult".[150][154]" - The word "unique" needs to be in quotations.
  • "According to American Popular Music : The Rock Years (2006), when the American music industry began its economic recovery in the mid-1980s from the fall of the disco era, Janet Jackson, among other multi-platinum selling music artists, was acknowledged for stimulating the overall increase in consumer purchasing of LPs, cassette tapes and CDs.[155]" - "According to American Popular Music"? Books aren't entities of their own - they're written by authors, so it's according to the person who wrote that opinion in the aforementioned book.
  • "Jackson has been credited for influencing a number of female R&B music artists, including Ciara, Beyoncé Knowles, Cassie, Aaliyah, Brandy, and Monica.[142]" - Accredited by?

The above are mere examples of why the article would fail at FAC - I could cite many many more. Much work is needed to ensure the article remains neutral and factually accurate, and doesn't present one opinion as being factual or as representing consensus. LuciferMorgan (talk) 22:20, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wackymacs

[edit]
Citations issues resolved. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 12:11, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Wackymacs (talk · contribs): - Focusing on the citations/references for now:

  • My main concern is that this article seems to rely on online sources rather than books. The References section lists a number of good books, but it seems like few of these have been used for actual footnotes. Therefore, you need to split this section and add a 'Further reading' section listing sources which have not been used. I highly recommend that you cite much of the early career and any other information possible to the best biographies available.
Many of the online sources were originally print sources, and are now archived on online databases, ie. Rolling Stone, The New York Times. These are the main sources that would be used anyways. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:50, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not necessarily. WesleyDodds (talk) 08:34, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
They have editorial oversight. Allmusic is fine as a source. WesleyDodds (talk) 08:34, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

— Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 06:39, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looking better, but I strongly oppose the use of allmusic and People Magazine instead of biographies by credible authors, and when this goes to FAC I will most likely Oppose based on this, since criterion 1c requires reliable sources. As I said, both allmusic and People do *not* cite their sources - what makes their biographies reliable? — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 08:53, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not all biographies cite their sources either. One of my pet peeves is when bios don't do that. While Bookkeeper can probably find better sources (be they print or digital), I wouldn't oppose based on the simple use of the People bio and Allmusic. Wikipedia:Verifiability states, "Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy.[4] Reliable sources are necessary both to substantiate material within articles and to give credit to authors and publishers in order to avoid plagiarism and copyright violations. Sources should directly support the information as it is presented in an article and should be appropriate to the claims made: exceptional claims require high-quality reliable sources." It also states, "In general, the most reliable sources are peer-reviewed journals and books published in university presses; university-level textbooks; magazines, journals, and books published by respected publishing houses; and mainstream newspapers. As a rule of thumb, the greater the degree of scrutiny involved in checking facts, analyzing legal issues, and scrutinizing the evidence and arguments of a particular work, the more reliable it is." This does not automatically discount these sources, but yes, better sources could possibly be found. I must impart though that some artists just don't have reliable biographical books written about them, so I wouldn't favor a book over an online source by default. It's the quality of the source that matters. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:02, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Published books used within the body of the article as a source

  1. Brackett, Nathan. Hoard, Christian David. The New Rolling Stone Album Guide. Simon and Schuster, 2004. ISBN 0743201698 ref 51
  2. Cornwell, Jane. Janet Jackson Carlton Books, 2002. ISBN 1842224646 ref 7
  3. Cullen, Jim. Popular Culture in American History. Blackwell Publishing, 2001. ISBN 0631219587 ref 149
  4. Cutcher, Jenai. Feel the Beat: Dancing in Music Videos. The Rosen Publishing Group, 2003. ISBN 0823945588 ref 143
  5. Dean, Maury. Rock-N-Roll Gold Rush. Algora Publishing, 2003. ISBN 0875862071 ref 132
  6. Gaar, Gillian G. She's a rebel: the history of women in rock & roll. Seal Press, 2002. ISBN 1580050786 ref 18
  7. Gates, Henry Louis. Appiah, Anthony. Africana: The Encyclopedia of the African and African American. Basic Civitas Books, 1999. ISBN 0465000711 ref 33
  8. Halstead, Craig. Cadman, Chris. Jacksons Number Ones. Authors On Line, 2003. ISBN 0755200985 ref 75
  9. Jaynes, Gerald David. Encyclopedia of African American Society. Sage Publications, 2005. ISBN 0761927646 ref 42
  10. Kramarae, Cheris. Spender, Dale. Routledge International Encyclopedia of Women: Global Women's Issues and Knowledge. Routledge, 2000. ISBN 0415920914 ref 43
  11. Mitoma, Judy. Mitoma, Judith. Zimmer, Elizabeth. Stieber, Dale Ann. Heinonen, Nelli. Shaw, Norah Zuňiga. Envisioning dance on film and video. Routledge, 2002. ISBN 0415941717 ref 139
  12. Ripani, Richard J. The New Blue Music: Changes in Rhythm & Blues, 1950-1999 Univ. Press of Mississippi, 2006. ISBN 1578068622 ref 26
  13. Starr, Larry. Waterman, Christopher Alan. American Popular Music : The Rock Years. New York Oxford University Press, 2006. ISBN 9780195300529 ref 148
  14. Vincent, Rickey. Clinton, George. Funk: The Music, The People, and The Rhythm of The One. Macmillan, 1996. ISBN 0312134991 ref 135
  15. Warner, Jay. On this Day in Black Music History. Hal Leonard, 2006. ISBN 0634099264 ref 156

The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 09:20, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know you've used published books, but you haven't used them for most of the biography (which is what matters), specifically refs 8 and 10 which are used numerous times, when there are clearly better sources available. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 09:53, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I trust Bookkeeper to cite whatever is useful out of these books. It could be that there's only a small bit worth citing from each book, but Bookkeeper can explain how each source is used if need be. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:28, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've limited both sources to being used three time in the article. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 11:31, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
People biography has been removed completely. Allmusic biography is now only used once. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 02:41, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review the prose soon. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 12:11, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Realist2

[edit]

I'm just adding stuff slowely, if at all, if I see things


Rossrs

[edit]

I'll also add things as I see them.

There are areas where short unrelated sentences create a 'clunky' effect. Have you tried reading the article out loud? That's a very good way to get a feel for how well it flows.

Example from the section "1986-1988: Control" - "The album debuted at number one on the Billboard 200.[7] It was a concept album based on Jackson's new-found independence.[12] Though Jam and Lewis were concerned with achieving cross-over appeal.... " Three unrelated ideas in three unrelated sentences. It doesn't flow. Maybe something like "Within six weeks, Jackson, Jam, and Lewis crafted Jackson's breakthrough album, Control, which was a concept album based on Jackson's new-found independence.[12] Though Jam and Lewis were concerned with achieving cross-over appeal, their primary goal was to create a strong following for the singer within the African-American community first.[13] Jam commented, "We wanted to do an album that would be in every black home in America... we were going for the black album of all time."[13] Released in February 1986,[12] the album debuted at number one on the Billboard 200.[7]" I think it flows better and is more "sequential". You've got the concept and creation in the first bit, the producer's intentions in the second (all of which took place before the release), then the release date, and the chart result.

Or... "Within six weeks, Jackson, Jam, and Lewis crafted Control, a concept album inspired by Jackson's new-found independence.[12] - Less wordy, and "breakthrough" isn't needed. The fact that it debuted at number one clearly demonstrates commercial success.

From "1982-1985:Early recordings" - "Martin Strong, author of The Great Rock Discography documented that although, both albums found limited success on the R&B charts, they failed to impact popular music.[9]" I think it's superfluous. Strong's assertion that they didn't impact popular music would only be necessary if someone had suggested that they had. The albums had middling success on the R&B chart, and none on the mainstream chart, so to say they didn't impact popular music, is kind of stating the obvious.

More to follow, I'm sure, but the article has improved greatly since I last read it. Rossrs (talk) 15:07, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll comment section by section, as time permits, and leave the lead until last. If it's something minor, I'll edit it rather than comment. Also as a test run for FA - will be harsh and ruthless. :-)

"1966-1982:Early life and career" :

  • "born into a family of musical prodigies" seems like POV, maybe it's not, but it's superfluous. The point is Janet was more interested in becoming a jockey. Should focus on that maybe.
  • Reworded. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 09:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "alongside" is used twice in one paragraph. maybe try "with" to avoid repetition. I'll edit that as "minor"
  • "Jackson" is used repetitively. Maybe some of them could be "she". I'll edit some as "minor"
  • "original" MGM - not relevant to Jackson. will remove as "minor"
  • "Jackson later commented the series was not a project she enjoyed working on." doesn't seem relevant without putting into context and explaining why she didn't enjoy. Otherwise, I think it could be removed.
  • link to titles of TV series. this is their first mention in the article body, rather than lead to linking is OK. I'll link them, but this is personal choice so if you want to unlink them, I won't quibble. Rossrs (talk) 09:15, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1982-1985:Early recordings

  • "By age sixteen, her father (and manager)" is a bit awkward. He needs to be identified as her manager, rather than mentioning it as as aside. Was he her manager during her early acting career? If so, it should go there. Or even earlier - "Her father, however, planned for her to follow in the family's footsteps and became her manager." (maybe) "By age sixteen" is vague - a date would be better, especially for such a career milestone. Rossrs (talk) 09:26, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • This has been rephrased and I added that he became her manager by age eight. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 09:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • The "don't call me 'Dad'" quote - that is amazing, and I'm glad you added that. The other part doesn't work though. "At age sixteen, Joseph Jackson arranged a contract..." Joseph was much older than sixteen ;-) I still think a date would be good, but "when Jackson was sixteen, her father... " would be OK too. Rossrs (talk) 10:09, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Yeah, and I bet he still wonders why all his children fired him at some point in their careers. I fixed that one sentence, (no one believes me when I say I suck at copy editing my own work!) and I'm sorry, but there's no date on when the contract was arranged. Janet's early years have been regarded as "forgettable" so journalists don't give much effort into documenting them. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 10:16, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • It still says her dad was 16...so I've made a minor change. I certainly don't think your copy editing sucks - but different people see different things. Fair enough, it's a shame journalists focus on her success more than her origins. She certainly didn't emerge fully fledged. Rossrs (talk) 10:26, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1986-1988:Control

The first paragraph is good, I think. The last paragraph I reworded to try to reduce the number of short sentences.

The middle paragraph has some issues - it's not easy to read.

  • "Newsweek and Rob Hoerburger of Rolling Stone compared Jackson's music favorably to contemporary rivals such as Whitney Houston, Patti LaBelle, and Diana Ross." Firstly, ""Newsweek and Rob Hoerburger of Rolling Stone" is wordy and awkward, and the whole sentence reads as though each writer commented on Houston, LaBelle and Ross. I don't know what Newsweek said, but Rolling Stone only mentions Ross. It would be clearer and easier to read if it said something like "The Newsweek review noted that Jackson's music compared favorably to ("rivals" is a POV word) contemporaries Whitney Houston and Patti LaBelle, and Rob Hoerburger of Rolling Stone said that .... Diana Ross etc etc".
  • The singles from the album. Again, not easy to read. Can we lose "The Pleasure Principle" as a minor hit? Up to you but I think it could say that "The first five singles, "What Have You Done for Me Lately," "Nasty," "When I Think of You", "Control," and "Let's Wait Awhile" all peaked within the Top 5; "When I Think of You" was Jackson's first number one single". Rossrs (talk) 10:19, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1989-1992:Janet Jackson's Rhythm Nation 1814

  • This is a very strong section. I've made a couple of minor rewordings, just for grammatical accuracy....
  • regarding the comment that it went to number one. The entire paragraph is about the intentions and reactions to the album, and the chart position is a little out of place. The following paragraph is all about sales and charts, so this would be a better place to put it, so that it doesn't chop from one aspect to another.
  • I've moved the "much like its predecessor" to follow the album, rather than Ripani's name because Ripani didn't have a predecessor, but it's grammatically wrong and without seeing what he said I don't know how to fix it. "Richard J. Ripani observed that the album, much like its predecessor, contained heavy styling of new jack swing; the use of sample loop, triple swing, rap vocals and blues notes are present in the album's title-track "Rhythm Nation". (I've highlight "are" because that's where it looks wrong to me - like it's from a quote, but I just don't know.)
  • "As Jackson began her debut tour, sources commented..." (have removed "debut" as minor change, the preceding sentence establishes it was her debut) - "sources commented" is the problem. "sources" isn't the right word, but what links Selvin and Allen? Would this work? - "As Jackson began her tour, she attracted positive comments regarding the cultural impact of her music", Joel Selvin said "this" and William Allen said "that". Rossrs (talk) 13:12, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • how about now? The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 13:27, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • The bit about debuting at number one - great. The comments from Selvin and Allen, yes that's more what I had in mind. I've had another thought - maybe it should be kept simple because the quotes, especially Allen's quote, are very specific and very strong. So rather than us try to preface their quotes with our own commentary, maybe they should speak for themselves. What do you think of : "As Jackson began her tour, she was acknowledged for the cultural impact of her music...."? Rossrs (talk) 13:50, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1993–1996: janet. and Poetic Justice

1997–1999: The Velvet Rope

  • "During the two year period prior to the release of her sixth studio album, The Velvet Rope, Jackson reportedly suffered from depression and anxiety. " - needs a source.
  • "based on Jackson's personal issues with self-esteem" - it's not clear what her personal issues are/were from the point of view of her artististic expression or whether it is Neil McCormick that is making an interpretation.
  • "placing her on par with Elton John, Diana Ross and The Rolling Stones" is too similar to "placed her on par with several other recording artists, including her older brother Michael Jackson, Madonna, and Tina Turner" - one of them just needs to be reworded
  • "gay icon" - I understand and agree that the term has use and is acceptable but I think in an encyclopedic context it should not be presented as fact. Here it says "established Jackson as a gay icon", and I think it is a little too strong. "Gay icon" is too intangible and too personal/individual to be used as an absolute. Did Neil McCormick call her a gay icon? If so, I think it should be attributed to him rather than attributed to Wikipedia. The way it reads is kind of like "based on the available evidence Wikipedia hereby decrees that Janet Jackson is a gay icon because one Neil McCormick said so". I think it's also kind of vague and ill defined, and in some cases kind of trivialized. The way it's sequenced, we have the real and tangible contribution to AIDS Research, the vague and difficult to define "gay icon" reference, and then the real and tangible acknowledgements by the National Black Lesbian and Gay Leadership Forum and the GLAAD Media Awards. I'd treat the definable actions/recognition/awards as more notable and put Neil McCormick after them. Then there is a 3x platinum certification just kind of dangling at the end. Maybe the gay recognition etc, should be in a paragraph of its own - it's a worthwhile theme to discuss, and the 3x platinum bit could go in the previous paragraph where the chart performance is discussed. Rossrs (talk) 13:43, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • DONE. He used the exact term gay icon, so I just quoted him. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 14:22, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well.... he says she "makes a bid for gay icon status" which is a different thing. But this fixes it. He doesn't sound like a fun person exactly, does he? I don't see too many GLAAD Awards in his future if he thinks a lesbian reinterpretation is "bizarre". "Unexpected", perhaps. "Not-something-Diana-Ross-would-have-done", sure. "I-bet-Madonna-could-just-rip-Janet's-face-off-because-she-wishes-she-thought-of-it-first", you bet. But "bizarre"? Rossrs (talk) 14:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2000–2003: Nutty Professor II: The Klumps and All for You

2004–2005: Super Bowl XXXVIII controversy and Damita Jo

The other sections to the end of the article - are all fine in my opinion. Well written, thorough, engaging, interesting. "Musical style and performance" and "Legacy" sections gives a very clear wrap-up of her overall impact and help give the article depth. I agree with User:Silverwolf85's comment about the choreography section. I think there are too many people offering an opinion - and they are all saying similar things, so it's a bit repetitive. The one person who should be saying something substantial - and isn't - is Jackson herself. Rossrs (talk) 12:26, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The lead section

  • A couple of things I changed - removed reference to Tyler Perry. I think the spotlight needs to stay on Janet in the lead. Jam and Lewis and the other Jacksons are fine, but if we mention Tyler Perry, why not Eddie Murphy? And then where does it stop?
  • I removed "though" from beginning of paragraph because it seems to suggest a contradiction that doesn't come, and "amidst her recording career" because it's just a bit jarring.
  • I think it might read a little better if Billboard's global sales figures (a truly staggering achievement) is mentioned first, and then the RIAA American sales figures second. Being in the top 10 global artists of all time is more significant than being the 11th best selling artist in the US.

I think the lead is currently the weak link in this article, and in my opinion it's now the only weak spot. How to fix it, I do not know, but it is taking shape. Rossrs (talk) 12:26, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's looking good -
  • Do you think this sentence from the lead " She faced initial difficulties after launching her recording career, often criticized for having a limited vocal range, and being yet another child from the Jackson family to become a recording artist." - could be removed? I don't think it's particularly significant as part of the article summary. Rossrs (talk) 13:34, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think it is. Ever since she began her career and even today, no matter how good her music/lyrics are, every critic has to comment on how small her voice is. Even in the the Musical Style section, rolling stone basically said "she can't sing, but thats ok!" And being the last of nine kids from the same family to start a record career was a big turn off for critics too. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 01:15, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I see what you mean. Well, the way it's written it places the criticism within the period of her first releases and Control, although the criticism about her thin voice has occurred from time to time throughout her career. "initial difficulties" is so vague, it could mean people threw tomatoes at her, and "after launching her career" is redundant because the average punter didn't criticise her before she started ;-). The lead is so important that every word and syllable has to serve a purpose, much more than in the article. The rest of the sentence about the criticism is fine and I agree with you, but the first half, needs to be chopped, I think. It's probably fixable with some minor rewording. Perhaps "She faced criticism for her limited vocal range, and for being yet another member of the Jackson family to become a recording artist."  ? Rossrs (talk) 07:01, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Silverwolf85

[edit]

Just finished a bit of a copy-edit. From what I can tell, everything seems pretty darn good. Of course, I am coming into this late in the game. :) My only critique, is the Choreography paragraph just seems a bit large and unwieldy when you read it.

I'll take another look at the whole thing tomorrow after I get some sleep...

Silverwolf85 (talk) 09:31, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note

[edit]

I added commentary by Jackson to "Control" "Musical Style and Performance" and "Choreography". Wess reworked the LEAD so everything should be ready to go now if there are no further complaints. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 20:46, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ Smith 2007, p. 1.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Janet_Jackson/archive1&oldid=1126871254"