Wikipedia:Peer review/Kelly Clarkson/archive1

Kelly Clarkson edit

I'm attempting to remove all of the constant fan-cruft and fan-gush from this article. Improving it to featured standard would definitely halt the daily information that never receives a citation or a verifiable source. Any information is welcome and I will resolve the issues in the article as soon as I make time for it. —Eternal Equinox | talk 21:34, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously, there need to be more inline citations. I'd also re-incorperate some of discography into the article (maybe just a simple list, similar to the way it's done on Gorillaz). For Concert tours and the Awards and nominations, I would link both under See also, instead of having these subsections with no content. Also, I'm not sure what the current consent on the band infobox is, but I personally find its usage on articles about single musician somewhat improper (especially the field "Origin" seems really strange, I think). And I'm not sure American Idol really qualifies as a "reality-television series". --Fritz Saalfeld (Talk) 12:24, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Improving it to featured standard would definitely halt the daily information that never receives a citation or a verifiable source. Wrong place then. You would want to reducethe article's visibility, not increase it. Circeus 17:30, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See Celine Dion for an example of a FA singer. You're going to need much more critical analysis, including critics in print references (newspapers, magazines, etc.—all music guide just doesn't cut it), talking about individual songs and albums and how her singing has progressed. Remove the reference to Wikipedia; that information must have come from somewhere. Inline citations are needed (see m:Cite/Cite.php). The three sections at the bottom that have links to separate articles need to summarize the content of those articles (see Wikipedia:Summary style). --Spangineer (háblame) 06:21, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]