Talk:Natalie Maines/GA1

GA Reassessment

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 05:05, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

To uphold the quality of Wikipedia:Good articles, all articles listed as Good articles are being reviewed against the GA criteria as part of the GA project quality task force. While all the hard work that has gone into this article is appreciated, unfortunately, as of February 26, 2010, this article fails to satisfy the criteria, as detailed below. For that reason, the article has been delisted from WP:GA. However, if improvements are made bringing the article up to standards, the article may be nominated at WP:GAN. If you feel this decision has been made in error, you may seek remediation at WP:GAR.

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   One stray sentence in the West Memphis Three Lawsuit section should be incorporated into the preceding paragraph, which may need to be split.

   'Awards section: http://paradiselost3.com Discussion and Information Forum should be removed.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   The cite ref #10 [1] should be attributed using a template for consistency.

   Two dead links found and tagged using WP:CHECKLINKS

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

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:

   Just a couple of concerns which should be addressed, major contributors and projects will be notified. Jezhotwells (talk) 05:27, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

   Following the concerns below from editors with an interest in this area, I shall delist this now. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:38, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

This is a very generous assessment. I see a lot of additional things wrong with the article:

• There are lots of uncited statements, more than would pass an initial GAN these days (this passed back in 2007).
• Some of the uncited claims are dubious ... she really listens to every minute of every Howard Stern show?
• There's no chronological flow to the article at all, it just jumps around and around.
• More is needed on her early artistic and musical influences is needed. She was a huge James Taylor fan, for example, and it was one of things she had in common with her parents.
• More on how she joined the band is needed. And the article doesn't make clear how she managed to be effective in country music, since it suggests she played other genres until then.
• The article is badly overweighted towards her "controversies", which get over 20 paragraphs compared to only 3 for her musical career (!). A description of her voice, her vocal style, her artistic approach, etc. is all badly needed. The Dixie Chicks went from total obscurity to megasuccess when they added her as lead singer, so there must be something to write about here! This shouldn't duplicate the Dixie Chicks article's description of their career successes, but instead focus on what Maines brings to the table.
• A description of her on-stage image, personal appearance style, etc. is also warranted.
• The instruments she plays should be discussed; is it only onstage that she plays?
• A lot of the Iraq War controversy section is duplicative of the account in the Dixie Chicks article. This section here should focus on Maines' reaction to it, how she dealt with the pressures, how it affected her relationship with the sisters, etc.
• There shouldn't be a quote in the first paragraph of the lead.
• Her current reluctance to record again (and the sisters creating the Court Yard Hounds as a result) should be covered.

Anyway, that's my take on it. To be honest, I don't think it's close to GA worthiness. Wasted Time R (talk) 15:43, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

• • Yikes. This would need a major overhaul. I don't even know where to start, and personally I think Dixie Chicks should be GA before its lead singer is. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 18:39, 25 February 2010 (UTC)