GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Jburlinson ( talk · contribs) 02:01, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
I'll be glad to review this article. I'm sorry you've had to wait so long for a response to your nomination. Comments to follow in the next 1-5 days. Thanks in advance for all your work!-- Jburlinson ( talk) 02:01, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | On the whole, this is a well-written article. It was copy-edited by the Guild of Copy Editors, which is great! | |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | Quotation needs to be sourced, even though it is substantially repeated in the body of the article. Please see MOS:CITELEAD. Wikipedia's Verifiability policy requires inline citations for all quotations, anywhere in article space. | |
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | Impressive work -- well done. | |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | Other than the one quotation in the lead, mentioned above, material is well-sourced. | |
2c. it contains no original research. | ||
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | Spot checks reveal no plagiarism. | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | This is the most problematic aspect of the article. Although the WP article for Latin Music defines this term as "any music that comes from Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking areas of the world, namely Latin America, Spain, and Portugal, as well as music sung in either language", the article has a predominant, almost exclusive focus on Latin American music. Music of Spain is mentioned only briefly in connection with Lola Flores and then again in a paragraph in the "visibility" section sourced to an article in Billboard lamenting the absence of women in contemporary music charts. This leaves out a considerable legacy starting at least with the Moorish period (good sources are The Music of Spain by Gilbert Chase and Music in Ancient Arabia and Spain by Julian Ribera) and continuing into later centuries with Gracia Baptista, who produced the first published composition by a woman composer and on into Zarzuela, with composers like Soledad Bengoecha de Cármena, and many famous women singers. There were also considerable Spanish musical movements in the 20th Century that featured female stars, like Yé-yé in the '60's ( Massiel, Laura Casale, Karina and others), and, later, in the '80's, La Movida Madrileña (e.g. Alaska). Portugese music gets a little more coverage, with a good paragraph on Fado. In Latin America, although it is the focus of the article, there are some gaps: little about Bossa Nova or Ranchera, for example, with no mention of such singers as Astrud Gilberto, Lucha Villa, Rocio Dúrcal and Lola Beltrán. Also no mention of Carmen Miranda. | |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | ||
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | There is a recurring theme of the relegation of women to men, but the material is well-sourced, so, in my mind, it retains neutrality. | |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | It appears that there's been an attempt to change the article's name to Women in Latin American Music. While this isn't exactly an "edit-war", there does some to be discomfort with the heavy emphasis on Latin America, as mentioned above. This is also mentioned in the Talk page. | |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | Images are plentiful, well-chosen and properly tagged. Great job! | |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | ||
7. Overall assessment. | There are many good things in this article and I enjoyed reading it. However, the issues regarding breadth of coverage keep it from achieving GA status, in my view. I would like to thank everyone who has contributed this article and. |
Review is on-hold for a week pending response to this initial version.-- Jburlinson ( talk) 01:58, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Jburlinson ( talk · contribs) 02:01, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
I'll be glad to review this article. I'm sorry you've had to wait so long for a response to your nomination. Comments to follow in the next 1-5 days. Thanks in advance for all your work!-- Jburlinson ( talk) 02:01, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | On the whole, this is a well-written article. It was copy-edited by the Guild of Copy Editors, which is great! | |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | Quotation needs to be sourced, even though it is substantially repeated in the body of the article. Please see MOS:CITELEAD. Wikipedia's Verifiability policy requires inline citations for all quotations, anywhere in article space. | |
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | Impressive work -- well done. | |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | Other than the one quotation in the lead, mentioned above, material is well-sourced. | |
2c. it contains no original research. | ||
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | Spot checks reveal no plagiarism. | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | This is the most problematic aspect of the article. Although the WP article for Latin Music defines this term as "any music that comes from Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking areas of the world, namely Latin America, Spain, and Portugal, as well as music sung in either language", the article has a predominant, almost exclusive focus on Latin American music. Music of Spain is mentioned only briefly in connection with Lola Flores and then again in a paragraph in the "visibility" section sourced to an article in Billboard lamenting the absence of women in contemporary music charts. This leaves out a considerable legacy starting at least with the Moorish period (good sources are The Music of Spain by Gilbert Chase and Music in Ancient Arabia and Spain by Julian Ribera) and continuing into later centuries with Gracia Baptista, who produced the first published composition by a woman composer and on into Zarzuela, with composers like Soledad Bengoecha de Cármena, and many famous women singers. There were also considerable Spanish musical movements in the 20th Century that featured female stars, like Yé-yé in the '60's ( Massiel, Laura Casale, Karina and others), and, later, in the '80's, La Movida Madrileña (e.g. Alaska). Portugese music gets a little more coverage, with a good paragraph on Fado. In Latin America, although it is the focus of the article, there are some gaps: little about Bossa Nova or Ranchera, for example, with no mention of such singers as Astrud Gilberto, Lucha Villa, Rocio Dúrcal and Lola Beltrán. Also no mention of Carmen Miranda. | |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | ||
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | There is a recurring theme of the relegation of women to men, but the material is well-sourced, so, in my mind, it retains neutrality. | |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | It appears that there's been an attempt to change the article's name to Women in Latin American Music. While this isn't exactly an "edit-war", there does some to be discomfort with the heavy emphasis on Latin America, as mentioned above. This is also mentioned in the Talk page. | |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | Images are plentiful, well-chosen and properly tagged. Great job! | |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | ||
7. Overall assessment. | There are many good things in this article and I enjoyed reading it. However, the issues regarding breadth of coverage keep it from achieving GA status, in my view. I would like to thank everyone who has contributed this article and. |
Review is on-hold for a week pending response to this initial version.-- Jburlinson ( talk) 01:58, 6 June 2018 (UTC)