Well I would first question if this is notable. That aside...the controversy section should be renamed or removed in line with BLP articles being npov. Also make sure the refs are consistent. I'm sure some of the refs without links can have them with a google search or something. other things to check for (I haven't read through it all) is ENGVAR consistency (Brit English in this case) and perhaps list it for copyedit at GOCE. (to get other input)
Lihaas (
talk)
22:19, 17 September 2013 (UTC)reply
urther, while the refs are consistent, I would still suggest reflinks as that is more detailed.
I made some changes (as in the "controversy" section title) and tagged stuff and also added hidden notes. Try and answer them. This should be good for a GA then I reckon.
Lihaas (
talk)
00:07, 21 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Ruhrfisch comments: As requested, here are some suggestions for improvement.
I think she is notable too.
I agree that "celebrity blogger" is confusing (and is not repeated in the article). Does it mean she blogs about celebrities? Does it mean she is a celebrity because of her blog (I think this is what is meant). If so, why not say something like "is a Singaporean known for her blog about her life, ..."
Per MOS, at least her birth year should be in the lead (since birth date and year are in the article itself)
Question Is that section of the MoS one of the five that the GA criteria mentions? Where in the first sentence of the lead section (which mentions both her real name and pseudonym, in both English and Chinese) should it be placed? --
J.L.W.S. The Special One (
talk)
05:58, 26 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Clarification Her blog does not have a specific name. Sources usually call it just "Xiaxue's blog" or "xiaxue.blogspot.com". The tagline "Everyone's reading it" is not its title, since she has changed the tagline before; past taglines include "Why are you worshipping the ground I blog on?" and "Chicken pie blogger". --
J.L.W.S. The Special One (
talk)
05:58, 26 September 2013 (UTC)reply
You yourself refer to her blog (singular) in your reply to my previous point. The section of the article is "Blog" (singular), not "Blogs". I went to her blog and did not see 9 other blog links. If nothing else, shouldn't all of the public blogs be linked in the EL section?
Ruhrfisch><>°°14:19, 28 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Partly done Changed section title from "Blog" to the more accurate "Blogging". Also changed the external link description from "Xiaxue's blog" to "Xiaxue's main blog". Did not add links to her other blogs as most are not notable and . --
J.L.W.S. The Special One (
talk)
06:20, 29 September 2013 (UTC)reply
What language(s) does she blog in? From her nickname, I assumed it might be written in Chinese, but the link I followed was to an English language blog.
Nothing should be in the lead that is not in the article. I am not sure this belongs in the lead, but how about making the first sentences of the "Blog" section something like this to address this and the previous comment: Xiaxue blogs in English. In addition to her main blog, she also writes a geeky blog, her media centre and several private blogs.
There are not a lot of dates / years. So when was she a "columnist for national newspapers TODAY and The New Paper, Maxim magazine and Snag magazine"? Were these one-time columns (guest columnist) or did she have regular writing assignments for these publications? Is it possible to reference the actual columns she wrote (and not just the story about them)?
Clarification with question She had regular writing assignments for these publications, but referencing the actual columns does not seem feasible. The PDF source does mention the years where she was a columnist for these publications. How should I include such information in the article? Due to...notably as a columnist for national newspapers
TODAY (2004) and
The New Paper (2005),
Maxim magazine (2005) and Snag magazine (2005) could be misread. --
J.L.W.S. The Special One (
talk)
05:58, 26 September 2013 (UTC)reply
The article cites lots of print sources, so I do not see why it couldn't cite some of her print blogs. These could be looked up in a library. I would imagine the first and last blog she wrote for each publication would be sufficent (and it may well be that these would give details that might be useful here - she might write in the first blog for a paper that she has been hired to write for a year, or she might say in the last one that she wrote 50 columns here in the past year (these are made up examples). How about something like Due to the popularity of her main blog, Xiaxue's work also appeared in mainstream media. She was a columnist in the national newspaper TODAY in 2004, and in 2005 wrote columns for The New Paper, and Maxim and Snag magazines.[5]
I think that the ref for this sentence In April 2008, she made a video about the iPhone, which she insists "was meant to be funny", but was dubbed "the worst iPhone review" by U.S. technology writer Daniel Lyons and ridiculed on other technology websites, including Gizmodo.[13] should include citations to Gizmodo and wherever Lyons made his remarks (not just a story in the New Paper)
Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see
Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)
Well I would first question if this is notable. That aside...the controversy section should be renamed or removed in line with BLP articles being npov. Also make sure the refs are consistent. I'm sure some of the refs without links can have them with a google search or something. other things to check for (I haven't read through it all) is ENGVAR consistency (Brit English in this case) and perhaps list it for copyedit at GOCE. (to get other input)
Lihaas (
talk)
22:19, 17 September 2013 (UTC)reply
urther, while the refs are consistent, I would still suggest reflinks as that is more detailed.
I made some changes (as in the "controversy" section title) and tagged stuff and also added hidden notes. Try and answer them. This should be good for a GA then I reckon.
Lihaas (
talk)
00:07, 21 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Ruhrfisch comments: As requested, here are some suggestions for improvement.
I think she is notable too.
I agree that "celebrity blogger" is confusing (and is not repeated in the article). Does it mean she blogs about celebrities? Does it mean she is a celebrity because of her blog (I think this is what is meant). If so, why not say something like "is a Singaporean known for her blog about her life, ..."
Per MOS, at least her birth year should be in the lead (since birth date and year are in the article itself)
Question Is that section of the MoS one of the five that the GA criteria mentions? Where in the first sentence of the lead section (which mentions both her real name and pseudonym, in both English and Chinese) should it be placed? --
J.L.W.S. The Special One (
talk)
05:58, 26 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Clarification Her blog does not have a specific name. Sources usually call it just "Xiaxue's blog" or "xiaxue.blogspot.com". The tagline "Everyone's reading it" is not its title, since she has changed the tagline before; past taglines include "Why are you worshipping the ground I blog on?" and "Chicken pie blogger". --
J.L.W.S. The Special One (
talk)
05:58, 26 September 2013 (UTC)reply
You yourself refer to her blog (singular) in your reply to my previous point. The section of the article is "Blog" (singular), not "Blogs". I went to her blog and did not see 9 other blog links. If nothing else, shouldn't all of the public blogs be linked in the EL section?
Ruhrfisch><>°°14:19, 28 September 2013 (UTC)reply
Partly done Changed section title from "Blog" to the more accurate "Blogging". Also changed the external link description from "Xiaxue's blog" to "Xiaxue's main blog". Did not add links to her other blogs as most are not notable and . --
J.L.W.S. The Special One (
talk)
06:20, 29 September 2013 (UTC)reply
What language(s) does she blog in? From her nickname, I assumed it might be written in Chinese, but the link I followed was to an English language blog.
Nothing should be in the lead that is not in the article. I am not sure this belongs in the lead, but how about making the first sentences of the "Blog" section something like this to address this and the previous comment: Xiaxue blogs in English. In addition to her main blog, she also writes a geeky blog, her media centre and several private blogs.
There are not a lot of dates / years. So when was she a "columnist for national newspapers TODAY and The New Paper, Maxim magazine and Snag magazine"? Were these one-time columns (guest columnist) or did she have regular writing assignments for these publications? Is it possible to reference the actual columns she wrote (and not just the story about them)?
Clarification with question She had regular writing assignments for these publications, but referencing the actual columns does not seem feasible. The PDF source does mention the years where she was a columnist for these publications. How should I include such information in the article? Due to...notably as a columnist for national newspapers
TODAY (2004) and
The New Paper (2005),
Maxim magazine (2005) and Snag magazine (2005) could be misread. --
J.L.W.S. The Special One (
talk)
05:58, 26 September 2013 (UTC)reply
The article cites lots of print sources, so I do not see why it couldn't cite some of her print blogs. These could be looked up in a library. I would imagine the first and last blog she wrote for each publication would be sufficent (and it may well be that these would give details that might be useful here - she might write in the first blog for a paper that she has been hired to write for a year, or she might say in the last one that she wrote 50 columns here in the past year (these are made up examples). How about something like Due to the popularity of her main blog, Xiaxue's work also appeared in mainstream media. She was a columnist in the national newspaper TODAY in 2004, and in 2005 wrote columns for The New Paper, and Maxim and Snag magazines.[5]
I think that the ref for this sentence In April 2008, she made a video about the iPhone, which she insists "was meant to be funny", but was dubbed "the worst iPhone review" by U.S. technology writer Daniel Lyons and ridiculed on other technology websites, including Gizmodo.[13] should include citations to Gizmodo and wherever Lyons made his remarks (not just a story in the New Paper)
Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see
Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)