Talk:Taylor Swift/GA1

GA Review

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

GA review (see here for criteria)

---

This article has a few intermediate problems and one large problem, and thus doesn't meet GA requirements

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   Too many short, choppy paragraphs. Much of the article reads like a prosefied list. In a few cases tenses are out of date. Tour names go in regular font, not italics, and awards don't get put into quotation marks. The citation formatting is very poor, with many bare URLs, many bare titles, and inconsistent formatting for the rest. Deadlinks need to be checked.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   See below

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

   The nominator doesn't seem to be a contributor to the article, never a good sign.

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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

The biggest problem with this article is that it focuses almost solely on Swift's career achievements in terms of charts and awards. Those are important but not the most important thing! There's very little about her music and her artistry: What is her songwriting approach and style? What techniques does she use that's made her so successful? What is her singing style like? What have music critics said about her work? There's very little on the high school dramas that make up the subject matter of many of her songs. There's very little on her personality, what drives her, what has made her this unusual success story. This Rolling Stone cover story profile, for example, contains far more of interest about her than this article's endless list of appearances, chart peaks, and awards. Until considerable work is done on this aspect, this article cannot meet the GA requirements for comprehensiveness and broad coverage of the subject. Wasted Time R (talk) 12:15, 25 July 2009 (UTC)