Talk:Connie Talbot's Christmas Album/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Moisejp (talk · contribs) 03:30, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello. I'm going to be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria for Good Article status. Moisejp (talk) 03:30, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguations: none found. Actually, I found two links that went to the wrong pages, but I fixed them.

Linkrot: ConnieTalbot.com doesn't seem to be working, so References #3 and 7 are both dead. Also, Reference #9 redirects to GameZone's main page. Reference #5 to the Sutton Coldfield Observer is also not linking properly.

Ok, they've clearly just redesigned the official site in the last few weeks. I'll see what I can do about that later. I've updated the other two- the hard reference is verifiable via Nexis, but there's no way to cite that. J Milburn (talk) 10:50, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

I'll try to finish my review within the next day or two. Moisejp (talk) 03:38, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

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

1. It is reasonably well written.

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

   The prose is fine and it complies with MoS, except for the (mostly minor) concerns below.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   All the info seems to match the sources well, except I couldn't check the dead links. Also, there is no source for some of the info in the first paragraph of "Recording and release".

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   It is a well-rounded account of the album's recording, release, publicity, critical reception and sales.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   It is neutral.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   It's stable and has had no edit wars.

6. 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):

   It has one image that has a proper fair-use rational.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

A few small concerns:

1. In the lead, I didn't know what "go into administration" meant—I had to look it up. I'm not sure if it's a chiefly British expression or if I'm just a dummy. In any case, would it be worthwhile to wiki-link it?

   Linked insolvency. It's a term which the British media threw around an awful lot a few years ago after the whole Northern Rock thing. J Milburn (talk) 11:03, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

   Great, thanks. Moisejp (talk) 15:27, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

2. In the first sentence of "Recording and release", we learn that "the album was recorded ... in Talbot's bedroom studio" and then a few sentences later that "though Talbot's voice was recorded near her home, other parts of the album were recorded elsewhere in the UK, as well as in the U.S., Bulgaria and Hong Kong." These two statements seem contradictory. The first one implies that the album was recorded at (and only at) her home, while the second one says it was recorded partly near her home, and partly elsewhere.

   Yeah, you're right, that's very confusing. I've rephrased- just to be clear, the "bedroom studio" is actually at a relative's house, not her own. J Milburn (talk) 11:03, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

   That's a good change. Hmm, I wonder whether "a bedroom studio" would be better than "her bedroom studio"? I'm not sure, it's just a thought. But "her bedroom studio" still sounds it's her bedroom, which is confusing since it's not her house. Anyway, you can think about it. Moisejp (talk) 15:27, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

3. Can you provide a reference for the second to fourth sentences of "Recording and release"? I thought I might find the info in the Credits section of the Allmusic overview of the album, but no such luck.

   I'll look into it. J Milburn (talk) 11:03, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

   Dunno if you already looked here (likely you did), but on the Internet Wayback Machine, for Connietalbot.com they don't seem to have full details of the album saved, but they do at least have the producer info, if you decide you want to use it from here: [1]. Moisejp (talk) 15:27, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

4. I don't suppose you can find more recent sales figures for the album? The ones listed now are almost two years old. If you can't, I guess it can't be helped.
   

   No, that's sadly not possible. I was surprised I could find them, to be honest. It's really not a very successful album, and I don't think she's really the kind of artist where people are greatly concerned about massive sales anyway! J Milburn (talk) 11:03, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

   OK, that's understandable. Moisejp (talk) 15:27, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Overall, it looks really good. The biggest issues are the dead links and the contradiction in the "Recording and release" section, and then there are a few other more minor quibbles. I'm putting this On Hold for a number of days until these issues are resolved. Moisejp (talk) 05:13, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

All right, the final issues have been fixed. I am passing this article. Good work! Moisejp (talk) 08:41, 1 November 2011 (UTC)