Talk:Jessica Martin/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Thebiguglyalien (talk · contribs) 19:41, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

I'll take this review on. It's been waiting in the queue a bit too long given how short it is. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:41, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   Clarity:

   • Martin became an impressionist on the fringe circuit. – When and where?

   • Added a year, but the three at the top of the theatre credits were the only venues I could find details in reliable sources for. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:44, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

   • She auditioned for several roles – What type of roles? Was she focused exclusively on impressionist roles by this point? And were they all television roles, or was she applying for stage roles too?

   • The Birmingham Mail, which is the source for this, says that after appearing on Radio, Martin "began an unsuccessful round of auditions" without any further details. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:30, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

   • Bremner and Martin toured theatres together in 1987, with a show of impressions. – Does the source say where? Were they limited to London, for example, or did they travel farther?

   • It was a national tour (added) but I couldn't find details of how many dates there were. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:30, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

   • Lottie Ames in Mack and Mabel, and Lottie Lacey in the revival of William Inge's The Dark at the Top of the Stairs. – Are there years for these?

   • added that both were in 2012. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:44, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

   Conciseness:

   • Her first job, in 1983 when she was 21, was as a resident singer at St James's Hotel and Club, where her father, Placido Martin, was the cocktail pianist. – Should be rewritten, maybe split into two sentences.

   • Split. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:44, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

   • She told an interviewer in 2019 – This feels tacked on. I expected the statement to be something about her career. Lead into the sentence so we know it's about her father.

   • Tweaked. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:44, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   Two comments on the lead. No issues with the other four manual of style guidelines.

   • whose career has diversified to include comic writing and illustrating – Would it be fair to simply call her a comic writer or an illustrator at this point? If not, then it probably shouldn’t be in the first sentence.

   • I've amended the lead - also added a few credits, including a recent stage performance. Let me know if it needs further reworking. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 14:33, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

   • The final sentence of the first paragraph feels tacked on. This might be my personal preference, but I would either change it to "She also" or I would rewrite it so the Doctor Who roles are in one sentence.

   • Amended. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 14:33, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   Sources are adequately formatted.

   B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   Citations placed throughout article, but some concern about the sources.

   • Several of the sources on this article appear to be tabloids, including the Daily Mirror, the Daily Record, and the Birmingham Mail. While these aren't automatically unreliable just for being tabloids, they're not ideal, especially for a BLP. I would strongly recommend replacing tabloid sources with better ones wherever possible, at least in the Life and career section.

   • I removed the Daily Record and Daily Mirror, but the Birmingham Mail source would be a big loss to the article. Based on Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_390#Birmingham_Mail, I'm hoping it's acceptable. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:44, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

   • Some sources I don't recognize and don't appear when I look them up: What's On: Wirral and Playing against the odds.

   • I found an online source, the Wirral Globe, that seems to be the same as the What's On: Wirral one, so amended it. Not sure what the Playing against the odds one was, looks like I miscopied something; replaced with the Daily Telegraph. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:44, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

   C. It contains no original research:

   No original research is apparent. Statements in the article plainly describe things the subject did or quotations of what people said.

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

   Only major WP:EARWIG result was a website that copied this article.

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   • Based on her webpage, she seems to consider cabaret specifically to be a significant part of her career, but the article does not mention it in the body.

   • Her cabaret performances don't really get any coverage in reliable sources, apart from the early sources included. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:44, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

   • I get the impression that she's more involved in Doctor Who and its fan community than the article suggests.

   • I had another look at the four-page article in Dr Who Magazine and didn't find any glaring omissions from the article here. Are there any independent sources that I'm missing here? BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 14:33, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

   • There is currently no section for awards or award nominations.

   • Added. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 14:33, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

   • I think her filmography should include her video game voice roles, even if it's just one.

   • Added. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 14:33, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
   • Added. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:44, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

   • A section on personal life or non-entertainment endeavors might be appropriate. Her quote about her father and her patronage would both go in such a section, but it might not be warranted if she doesn't have any other notable facts about her life outside of acting and illustrating.

   • Unsurprisingly, there is more in her autobiographical graphic novel, but I didn't find enough in independent reliable sources to add anything else. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:44, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style): {{GAList/check|pass}

   No unnecessary detail.

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

   No neutrality issues.

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

   No recent edits.

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   One image taken by nominator and released under Creative Commons.

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

   Image is of subject, captioned with year.

7. Overall: This article largely meets the GA criteria, and it's mostly minor issues that need correction. My main concerns are the reliability of some of the sources and a few details that might be missing. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:11, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

   Pass or Fail:

Many thanks for a helpful and constructive review, Thebiguglyalien. Unfortunately there's not enough detail in indpendent reliable sources (that I could find) to fully address all of your comments. I've replied to your points above - let me know what else is required. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 14:33, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

It seems the article covers everything that can be expected given the available sources. My one remaining comment was that the first sentence wasn't as succinct as it could be, but it felt silly to hold the article back for something so little, so I've reworded it myself. Feel free to change it to your liking. I'll go ahead and pass the article now. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 15:26, 3 January 2023 (UTC)