Talk:Carol Kaye/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: 100cellsman (talk · contribs) 19:38, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

I'll be reviewing this article soon.

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

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   "Her tracks for Quincy Jones so impressed him" I found this wonky.

   I don't think that needs to be there - the sentence makes sense without it Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:22, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

   "but has continued her career and has been praised by many musicians for her work." Maybe it's just me, but I personally tend to be bothered when I see the same word (had) being used multiple times in the same sentence.

   Tweaked Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:22, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   Paraphrase the section where she played bebop jazz in nightclubs. (Don't worry about the twitter profile being listed in the copyvio detector, I'm pretty sure they copied and pasted some of the article.)

   How's that? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:08, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

   Looks good!100cellsman (talk) 23:53, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   "Dr. John has said that Kaye "is a sweetheart and a kick-ass guitar player as well as a kick-ass bass player"." I feel that this quoted statement from someone else on her official website is in poor taste here.

   In what way? I've said on-wiki that I think Megalibrarygirl is "a sweetheart and a kiss-ass librarian as well as a kick-ass Wikipedian" [1] and nobody seemed to mind. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:03, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

   Forgive my lack of context. The quote isn't bad, but it was by another artist that is sourced by her official website, a primary source. It could seem like that the site could have warped his quote.100cellsman (talk) 22:21, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

   I don't think so, it does like sound the sort of thing that Dr. John would say, and particularly towards fellow studio musicians who joked around with each other to pass the time. I don't think Kaye would have mentioned it if it had any possibility of being libellous. If this is the one thing holding up review, we can always get a second opinion. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:50, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

   "In one interview segment, she said at the peak of her session activity she was making more money than the US President." Although I could verify it, something about this statement feels off. Perhaps its the wording.

   Changed it to "In one interview segment, she said that she believed ..." which makes it more clear the article is talking specifically about her opinion, and nothing else. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:03, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

   Ritchie333, can I hear your thoughts on these tidbits?

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   So you were unable to find any free images of her? I often refer to myself as an expert free image finder (not really), but I couldn't find some either, so I'll let that go.

   Nope, but there aren't many images of her full stop, she was just the sort of person who knuckled down and got on with the job. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:12, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   So despite that irk I had about that quote from Dr. John, which is to me not that important for a second opinion, I decided to pass the article. Thank you for your contribution to it, I feel privileged to have learned about such an important musician, albeit obscured.100cellsman (talk) 23:06, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

   Thanks for the review. It's good that sources are finally starting to document her work; as you can see, she's a bit of a superhero. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:09, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Hey Ritchie333, you haven't left any sort of input three days since I started this review. Are you going to work on this article? I'll be failing it in a week if there is no activity.100cellsman (talk) 02:48, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

I was just assuming you were going to add more comments before tackling it. I'll take a look this afternoon, hopefully. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:33, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Hooray! You replied! I can definitely provide more insight while reviewing it.100cellsman (talk) 23:53, 2 November 2018 (UTC)