Wikipedia

Talk:Shaparak Khorsandi/GA1

< Talk:Shaparak Khorsandi
Latest comment: 8 months ago by Garnet-Septagon in topic GA Review

GA Review edit

Latest comment: 8 months ago62 comments2 people in discussion
Passed. Garnet-Septagon (talk) 08:29, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Garnet-Septagon (talk · contribs) 14:01, 5 August 2023 (UTC)Reply


Hi, I'm going to be reviewing this article as per the WP:GACR.

Quick Fail Criteria edit

For this section I'm looking at the revision as of 16:47 on 30 July 2023.

  Passed Not a long way from meeting any of the GA criteria
  Passed All images are CC licenced
  Passed No cleanup tags
  Passed Stable
  Passed No previous GA nomination

Reference spot checks edit

For this section I'm looking at the revision as of 16:47 on 30 July 2023.

"Fixed" version is as of 21:08 on 5 August 2023.

Sources are all reliable - mostly well-regarded British newspapers and the BBC. My only concern at the moment is that since a lot of these are interviews, we might see a reliance on primary material, so the relevant policies will be WP:BLPRS, WP:SELFSOURCE and I'll also consider the essay WP:INTERVIEWS. Since this is a biography of a living person, I'll do a separate assessment viz the policy WP:BLP.

Spotchecks are a GA requirement; I'll pick a few citations and check to see that the source correctly supports the citation.

  •  N FN 4(a): "The family fled from Iran to London after the Islamic Revolution following a joke that her father composed which was seen as critical of the revolutionary regime."
    • The source states

      "Her father, Hadi Khorsandi, a satirist who was initially supportive of the revolution, had to leave when things became too dangerous after he made a joke that suggested the regime’s fanaticism had gone too far ... 'They didn’t move to England to have that for me.'"
      ...
      "Like Lady Hamilton, Khorsandi considers herself a misfit. Part of that relates to coming from a family who fled Iran. Her memoir, A Beginner’s Guide To Acting English, describes the strangeness of arriving in England as immigrants, as well as the fear of the regime which still pursued the family, the constant checking under cars for bombs."


      However, it doesn't say that they went to London, or that it was a direct result of her father's joke. I can't access the FT article that's also referenced in this (FN 5) but if that can be used on its own, or if it marries up with this source in a way that indisputably links it all together, then please could you provide a quotation? (N.B. the archive link for that source also just goes to a paywall)
      • the FT article has "Her family settled in the UK in 1979 when their life in Tehran became too dangerous. Initially supportive of the revolution, her father, satirist and poet Hadi Khorsandi, fell foul of the new regime after a light-hearted joke suggested their fanaticism was going too far ...Even in London the family often lived in fear." - admittedly its not entirely explicit that they moved to London, but I took it to mean that. Does changing "London" to "the United Kingdom" work? BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 18:17, 5 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
    •   Fixed I think it's reasonable to infer from that they fled to London, and that quotation supports the article text. Garnet-Septagon (talk) 07:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
  •  N FN 4(b): "In 2017, she came out as bisexual."
    • The source says

      She quickly gets down to the nitty gritty, the very personal, and will talk, for instance, about coming out as bisexual and how she admires the way young people today talk about sexuality. She recalls how difficult it was to be out, particularly as bisexual, when she was young. (She recently wrote that, although she was bisexual and had marched for Pride since she was 17, she'd never come out as such.)

      but not that she came out in 2017. The other source (19) supports this alone so I think this footnote can be removed.
      • I had erred on the side of caution in including a second reference for her bisexuality. I've removed that redundant reference. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 18:35, 5 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
    •   Fixed Garnet-Septagon (talk) 07:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
  •  N FN 10: "She later became a patron of Humanists UK, which appointed her as its President for a three-year term from January 2016, succeeding Jim Al-Khalili." I think this must be a mistake as it's just a press release on one of her novels and makes no reference to this. I'm going off the archive link. The assertion is supported in full by FN 9.
  •  N FN 12: "She married fellow comedian Christian Reilly in 2005, and they had a son." The source doesn't say that they married in 2012 or that her son is his. The source for FN 4 said that Reilly is the father so you can use that and perhaps another one that gives the year of their marriage.
  •  N FN 17: "The siblings were raised bilingual and Khorsandi is fluent in Farsi." The source states that she was raised bilingual but does not mention her brother: "Never had I been so thankful for my parents’ insistence that I learned Farsi, and that I remained bilingual after the UK became our home."
  •  Y FN 21(a), 21(b)
  •  N FN 22: Broken links
    • I found an earlier archive copy, but the site doesn't seem to be suitably independent so I've removed the information it supported from the article. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 18:57, 5 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
    •   Fixed Garnet-Septagon (talk) 07:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
  •  Y FN 25
  •  ? FN 30: I think you could argue this one either way. The exact quotation is "lively, ambitious and interesting, though the more narrative-based second half was thinner on laughs than the first." which I don't think, strictly speaking, supports the article saying "he felt that the quality of the second half of the show was not as good as the first". The quotation could also be read as a musing on how it's different but not necessarily worse quality. I'd suggest thinking about rephrasing this slightly or finding another review if possible.

I'm going to pause the review here while you address these issues: it might be worth combing through all the references in the Biography section as this is where most of the issues were, and this is the part that will likely need the most careful attention given that this is a biography of a living person.

I can officially put this review "on hold" if necessary; please let me know if you'd like more than a week to address this and I'll do that.

  • Thanks for your careful review, Garnet-Septagon. I've been through the biography section and made a few tweaks, and should be able to go through the rest of the article text in the next day or two. I'll let you know when it's ready for you to resume. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:47, 5 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
    • I've been through the rest of the article and made a couple more tweaks, and I think it's ready for the resumption of your review. Thanks. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 20:44, 5 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
      Great, all looks good. Regarding the first one, I think it's reasonable to infer from that that they fled to London, so the article text can stay as is. I'll update the list above to make it clear that all issues have been fixed and continue with the review proper. Garnet-Septagon (talk) 07:39, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
      I think I've addressed everything now, Garnet-Septagon; hopefully the text I added hasn't created too many new issues. Thanks again for your advice. (The Aston and Harris chapter is available through SpringerLink on The Wikipedia Library if you want to have a look at it.) Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 14:56, 10 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
      Good work, I'll promote it to GA. Garnet-Septagon (talk) 08:27, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

GA Criteria edit

I'm going to put a summary box here and if I have to go into more detail about any of the things I'll write further notes below it, because editing in a table is a pain.

I'll edit the statuses as I go along so things might switch between 'fail' and 'unknown' if you address things while I'm still looking. But I'm intending that things marked as 'pass' stay that way, at the very least to give us a sense of momentum.

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.
  1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. Lead section:  Y
Layout:  Y
Words to watch:  Y
Fiction:  Y
List incorporation:  Y
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.
  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).
  2c. it contains no original research. Text-source integrity is very clear.
  2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
  3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
  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. See #BLP
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
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.
  6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
  7. Overall assessment.

Further notes edit

1a edit
  • Career in comedy section: "she reflected that this sport "led to regular TV bookings..."" - 'sport' should probably be 'spot'. That's a bit of an industry-specific term though, I suggest 'appearance'.
      Fixed Garnet-Septagon (talk) 12:07, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
  • General style: Wikipedia:Reviewing_good_articles specifies that "The article should be clearly written, in good prose". Broadly speaking there aren't major problems with the way this article is written - the grammar is fine and it's clear what everything means. However, my issue with it is that a lot of it is written a bit like a listicle instead of an encyclopaedia article. If you take this section of Biography:

She married fellow comedian Christian Reilly in 2005, and they had a son.[12] They divorced in 2011.[13] Her daughter was born in June 2013.[13] In a 2014 interview she said "I'm doing it all on my own, I have no contact with the father. But that's fine, I'm not angry or bitter about it."[13] As of 2022, she was in a relationship with fellow comedian Mark Steel.[14] Her brother Peyvand also did stand-up comedy for a while but decided to pursue a career in journalism.[15][16] Khorsandi was raised bilingual and is fluent in Farsi.[17] Khorsandi was diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder aged 47.[18] In 2017, she came out as bisexual.[19]

Firstly, it reads as a really choppy collection of short sentences instead of prose that flows. I think it needs a few conjunctions ("She married fellow comedian ... and they had a son, but divorced six years later. Her daughter was born in June 2013, and Khorsandi said in a 2014 interview ...")

Secondly, it kind of sprinkles in random facts like the sentence about her brother, being bilingual, having ADHD. If these facts are notable then I think they need a bit more - they could each be their own short paragraph if you can find sources that explain why they're relevant to the subject of the article (why did Peyvand choose journalism (does it have anything to do with Shaparak?) Does she do anything for ADHD awareness or LGBT causes?). To a lesser extent this goes for the Career section as well. I think it was wise to put a bit at the bottom "Her other television appearances have included..." because then you can strip out the stuff that isn't commented on further (e.g. with reviews). I'd like to see the reviews and significance of the shows mentioned in Career fleshed out further, which should be possible given how high-profile she is.

  • I thought the mention of Peyvand as having been a stand-up comedian was fairly relevant given that his sister has that role and their father was a satirist, but no objections to removing it. I've added a mention of her 2023 book that focuses on her ADHD. Working on the other points. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:59, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
I don't think her brother is necessarily irrelevant, but that sentence really stands out as one that doesn't fit with anything else. You've already improved it by expanding on ADHD and sexuality, but the paragraph goes from talking about her religion to her partners and children to her brother to her ADHD to her sexuality all in one bunch.
For the middle part of the Biography section, I think if you put her relationships first ("She married fellow comedian...") and make it its own paragraph, because it comes first chronologically, then a short paragraph for ADHD and sexuality, then that would be a better structure. If you add a little about her father in the section's first paragraph, because he was a comedian, you could elegantly fit in that her brother was also briefly a stand-up comic. Garnet-Septagon (talk) 16:16, 7 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
  • I've taken out the short sentence abut her brother, and rearranged the rest, which hopefully makes it a bit better. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:51, 8 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

You may get ideas or inspiration from James Acaster, which was promoted to GA this week. I think the prose in that article is much more varied and the career section is more fleshed-out, and there are obvious similarities with the structure of this article given that they're both comedians. WP:PARAGRAPH may also help.

For some reason, the amount of coverage of useful sources for Khorsandi really seems to dip after 2017, until recently. As you've observed, an awful lot of it is interviews. She did say that being on I'm a Celebrity made her realise that she was content and didn't want to seek to be really famous, so perhaps that has something to do with it. There are literally hundreds of listings or press-release-based gig-preview results which makes it hard to find useful sources. I did add a bit more from the Aston and Harris chapter, which has some analysis. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:51, 8 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
1b edit
  • Should have a name pronunciation (MOS:LEADPRON), especially given that part of the article talks about how she initially went by Shappi because people mispronounced Shaparak.
    I've not done it before but the official guidance is here: WP:MOSPRON.
    If you're editing on desktop then the dropdown above the edit summary has an option for "IPA (English)" to get the right symbols. As far as I know it's just a case of picking the right symbols for the right sounds, with a ' in front of the syllable that's stressed.
    If you can cite audio/video of her saying her own name then that would be ideal. A quick search has turned this up, although unfortunately it's an advert: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Trt8GnnQbCU Garnet-Septagon (talk) 12:05, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
    I've had a bash - what do you think about IPA: ['ʃɑːpəræk:kɔː'sændi] (Sharper-rack Core-sandy) ? BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 12:38, 8 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
    Looks pretty good to me, I'm not clear on long vs half-long vowel sounds and all that (the final i might be half-long but I really don't know). I would say that the 'r' definitely sounds more like an 'ɾ' ('flapped r') though (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a0/Alveolar_tap.ogg). And I don't think you separate words with a colon? The pages on Nicolae_Ceaușescu and Kim Jong Un don't anyway.
    Definitely include a source to her saying it because I (and probably many others) pronounce it "Shapparak" instead of "Sharperak". Garnet-Septagon (talk) 13:17, 8 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
    I assumed that pronunciation too. With the link, hopefully at some point someone might improve the IPA. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 14:49, 10 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
  • "until June 2021 known as Shappi Khorsandi" is confusing when her official website (which is shappi.co.uk and listed in the infobox) still exclusively refers to her as Shappi. I'm not sure there's an elegant way out of this given that she's also written about changing her name back, just pointing it out in case you can think of one.
    • but I would change "until June 2021" to "previously" as this is only the lead and it's discussed elsewhere.
      • I've amended to " previously performed professionally as" in the lead and similarly in the body text, but am open to any other ideas. 11:04, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
      • I've removed the "professionally" because I didn't think it was necessary but otherwise seems fine.
          Fixed Garnet-Septagon (talk) 12:41, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
  • "Vice-President" should be "Vice-president" according to MOS:PEOPLETITLES
      Fixed Garnet-Septagon (talk) 12:08, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
  • The lead describes her breakout show as Asylum Speaker, which is supported in the article, but the article also says how she herself considered the Secret Policeman's Ball to be when she got big. I'd change this to something like "she rose to national prominence after her 2006 Edinburgh Festival Fringe show Asylum Speaker, and appearing at the Secret Policeman's Ball two years later."
    Actually this would read better as: "She rose to national prominence after her 2006 Edinburgh Festival Fringe show Asylum Speaker and her appearance at the Secret Policeman's Ball two years later."
    I'm worried that it seems weird that she 'rose to prominence' after two events two years apart, but I suppose it's fine. Garnet-Septagon (talk) 12:12, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
    I've amended to your wording. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:16, 7 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
      Fixed Garnet-Septagon (talk) 16:01, 7 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
  • Lists: I saw you put a note on the talk page about spinning her filmography off into its own page. If you're going to do that then that's fine, but if it remains on this page my suggestion is to turn it into "Selected Television Appearances" because MOS:TIMELINE states that "it is expected that the information will be supported elsewhere in the article by prose analysis of the main points". IMO it's more for websites like IMDB to collate lists of all media appearances.
2a edit
2b edit
  • There's an uncited quotation in Books section: 'Throughout the book, she explains how the Persian language differs from English: "They called me 'poppet'. Iranians said 'jaan' or 'azizam'."'. The citation two sentences later contains something similar but not exactly the same.
      Fixed Garnet-Septagon (talk) 12:13, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
  • Do we have a source on her name written in Persian? Only a minority of readers will, so it could easily be vandalised and go undetected. I don't think it's actually required though, I can't find a relevant policy.
    • A machine translation gives "Shaperak Khorsandi" but I tend to favour deleting it as uncited. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:38, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
    Yep that's fine, remember to delete both instances. Garnet-Septagon (talk) 12:14, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

BLP edit

I'm going to go over WP:BLP as well in this section.

Writing style  Y
Reliable sources  N

  • This is the main reason I've done this in a separate section; because of the mention of her claim about Boris Johnson.
    • For BLPs, "contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced should be removed immediately and without discussion".
    • This article states that Khorsandi states that Johnson inappropriately touched her, in an article that explicitly draws parallels with the Charlotte Edwardes case.
    • The source is a column by Khorsandi in The Independent, a source listed as reliable in Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources.
      • Columns don't have the same rigour as standard articles, but it's a step up from a self-published source.
    • As far as I can see, Johnson or a representative for him has not commented.
  • Given that this is a grey area, I think we should consider whether including it makes the article better. The article states that Khorsandi "had included references to this in some of her stand-up routines" with this source, but I can't actually see that in the article. If we can confirm that that's the case, and/or get some more secondary sources on the accusation, then that would make me comfortable with it. Otherwise I think it should be removed.
    • Khorsandi's column includes "I mentioned it in my stand-up routine for a while and thought nothing more of it"; I've amended the punctuation to hopefully make it clearer that it was her writing this. An article in The Times for 1 October 2019 has "Shappi Khorsandi, a comedian and author, claimed that Mr Johnson touched her during BBC Question Time in 2006. Khorsandi said she felt "duty bound" to reveal details because Edwardes's claims were "not believed by some". She wrote on Twitter: ..."; The print edition of The Guardian on 5 October 2019 had an "Issue of the Week: Boris Johnson groping allegations" piece that reprinted three paragraphs of Khorsandi's article (alongside extracts from two other articles not mentioning her). Given that her allegations are referred to in these two, which are amomg the UK's quality papers (as well as getting coverage in others of less repute like the Mirror, Metro etc.), I'm inclined to retain the point but have no strong ojection to removing it. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 15:04, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
Apologies, I don't know how I missed the reference in the column to including it in her standup. I'd add the Times citation because it has a different source, but the others are obviously just going off the Independent column. Fine to leave it in. Garnet-Septagon (talk) 15:09, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
I've added The Times source; the allegations also appeared in some New Zealand papers, one of which I've added, to hopefully help show that the inclusion of the allegations is not undue. (But, like most everything, I'm not precious about this.) BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:26, 8 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Presumption in favor of privacy  Y

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Shaparak_Khorsandi/GA1&oldid=1169788894"