Wikipedia:Peer review/Stephen Colbert/archive3
| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to know what underlying issues there are which prevent it from being FA material. In particular, some of the literature used as references may be suspect or questionable and whether undue weight is given in any particularly section. Additionally, there were some questions as to whether or not the article should have passed GA back in 2010, those concerns appear to have been allayed, but I would like to know if there are issues which are not acceptable for a GA.
Thanks, James (T • C) • 12:51 PM • 01:51, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Comments from Csisc
[edit]I think that it is a very excellent work. However, it can be better if you expand the part related to his political activity by insisting on his affiliation and his thoughts. This can be tracked from Newspaper Interviews and Blog Posts. --Csisc (talk) 08:38, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Comments from karanacs
[edit]The largest problem with this article is the sourcing.
- The article appears to rely heavily on newspaper and magazine articles. You will need to consult the two biographies listed in the Further Reading section before it would pass FA. The biographies will give more information, more context, and appropriate weight to the events of his life than simply compiling a lot of newspaper articles. Once you've read the biographies and used them to make the bulk of the article, the newspaper articles can be used to provide additional detail or commentary, where appropriate.
- Some of the websites used are not reliable sources:
- Ethniccelebs.com
- Ancestor Tree
- Mediabistro.com??
- Comedians.about.com
....
- Cleanup
- There are inconsistencies in formatting some of the existing refs
- Several links in the references that gives a dead link
- Why does the Notes section exist when there are no notes?
Karanacs (talk) 15:17, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
Comments from SNUGGUMS
[edit]General comments:
- I do agree with Karancs that citations to biographies should be used, and that the sources mentioned above are not reliable.
- Remove the "notes" section as it is empty.
- I'm not too sure that "Discography" is needed.
- In the "filmography" section, there should be no rowspans per WP:FILMOGRAPHY.
From the lead:
- "[Colbert] is an American political satirist, writer, producer, singer, television host, actor, media critic, and comedian"..... overkill. He isn't known as a singer at all, and I'd probably also scrap "producer".
- "It was announced on April 10, 2014, that Colbert had been chosen to succeed David Letterman as the host of the Late Show on CBS after Letterman retires in 2015"..... would succeed Letterman
- "He gained considerable attention" doesn't seem very encyclopedic
- The nominations for Primetime Emmy Awards are less important than those he won, so I'd just say "Colbert has won siz Primetime Emmy Awards"
From "Early life":
- "Colbert was born in Washington, D.C., the youngest of 11 children in a Catholic family. He grew up on James Island in Charleston, South Carolina. Colbert and his siblings, in order from oldest to youngest, are James, Edward, Mary, William, Margo, Thomas Jay, Elizabeth, Paul, Peter, and Stephen."..... rework this as something like "Colbert was born in Washington, D.C., to a Catholic family. He grew up on James Island in Charleston, South Carolina. Colbert grew up with 10 older siblings; James, Edward, Mary, William, Margo, Thomas Jay, Elizabeth, Paul, and Peter."
- Elizabeth should link to Elizabeth Colbert Busch
- Per MOS:SURNAME, instances of "Stephen" should be replaced with "Colbert"
I haven't looked very far, but can definitely say this has a long way to go before it is FA-worthy. Recommend taking this to the WP:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors. There are also unsourced statements, and a good rule of thumb to follow is to end each paragraph with at least one inline citation. Snuggums (talk / edits) 09:22, 26 February 2015 (UTC)