Wikipedia:Peer review/Paul McCartney/archive1

Paul McCartney

So much potential for FA, article needs some feedback. -- Wikipedical 00:36, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

• Here are the things that I find needing improvement before reaching FAC as of this edit. Please read all points before editing, as you may be able to solve two problems with one edit. Feel free to strike out when completed. (Location is donated by Section:Paragraph#:Sentence#) Newnam^(talk) 05:50, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
  1. Intro:1 - First paragraph should be more than one sentence...perhaps merge with other pieces of lead
  2. Intro:2:1 - Who recognises him as an icon? Could be construed as point of view.
  3. Intro:2:2 - What are "#1 singles" (I know, but a lot won't by the wording)? Worded as "He has a record twenty-nine" implies that he owns the single...so do I (maybe reword to "performed" or "written" or both, depending on what it was). Also, perhaps phrase it as twenty-nine "#1 singles" in the United States, rather than twenty-nine U.S. "#1 singles" (with "#1 singles" still needing improvement).
  4. Intro:2:3 - "Top ten" of what? What makes his talent as a bassist "influential"?
  5. Intro:2:4 - "Highly successful" is a bit much. If anything, just "successful", but even that seems POV.
  6. Intro:3:1 - Wings is "introduced" here, but discussed earlier. Should be introduced before mentioned (I hope that makes sense).
  7. Intro:3:3 - The last part doesn't need parentheses.
  8. Intro:4 - Also would be better with more than one sentence. Maybe this could be combined with the first paragraph. Change "aside from" to "in addition to".
  9. Early Years:1:1 - I don't think his full name is needed again here. What is Walton supposed to link to?
  10. Early Years:1:2 - Replace the semicolon with a period. Wikilink Roman Catholic and Protestant.
  11. Early Years:1:3 - What is a "dance-band"?
  12. Early Years:1:5 - Is the location of where he traded the instrument that important. IMO it is not needed.
  13. Early Years:1:6 - The whole thing seems wordy, maybe changed to "The early death of his mother Mary was a formative influence on the his life. She died from breast cancer, on October 31, 1956 when he was 14".
  14. Early Years:2:1 - Wikilink "Irish" to Irish people.
  15. History(RIB):1:2 - Before "Stuart Sutcliffe" remove "the addition of".
  16. History(RIB):1:4 - Rephrase to "McCartney took over bass guitar duties in the early 1960s following the departure of Sutcliffe, after Lennon and Harrison had declined".
  17. History(RIB)(S):1:1 - Is "eyeball to eyeball" a good or bad thing? What is it supposed to mean? They collaborated on many what?
  18. History(RIB)(S):1:2 - Remove "out" from the beginning of the sentence. "It is claimed" are weasel words.
  19. History(RIB)(S):1:5 - The "(naturally)" is unneccesary and POV.
  20. History(RIB)(S):1 - Be consistent with "McCartney/Lennon" or "McCartney - Lennon". Or if there is a differenc, don't make them sound the same.
  21. History(RIB)(B):1:2 - Place a "The" before the "Beatles" (proper title). Also, place apostrophe to denote possession.
  22. History(RIB)(B):1:3 - Specify "writing" as "song writing". Very long sentence...perhaps too long.
  23. History(RIB)(B):2:1 - "It is now generally accepted" seems like weasel words.
  24. History(RIB)(B):2 - Has nothing to do with him being a bassist (shouldn't be under 'bassist' section).
  25. History(RIB)(B):3:1 - What is the use and context of "mature" and "middle Beatles period"...needs more explaining.
  26. History(RIB)(B):3 - Also has nothing to do with him being a bassist (shouldn't be under 'bassist' section).
  27. History(RIB)(OI) - What is this section title supposed to mean. Doesn't seem to have anything to do with its contents.
  28. History(RIB)(OI):1:1 - It doesn't help this article to know who The Family Way starred.
  29. History(RIB)(OI):1:2 - The comma after "released as an album" is not needed.
  30. History(RIB)(OI):1:3 - Remove "he" after "these outside productions".
  31. History(RIB)(OI):2:2 - Remove the dash and replace with a comma after "began an affair" and before "however".
  32. History(RIB)(OI):2:6 - Place "Heather" after "Linda's daughter" and place commas around Heather. Be consistent with birthyears in parentheses...use "(Born 19xx)" or "(Born in 19xx)", but use the same throughout.
  33. History(RIB)(OI):2:7 - Replace "would remain" with "remained" and remove "and devoted".
  34. History(RIB)(EOTB):1:1 - Change the first "he" to "McCartney".
  35. History(RIB)(EOTB):1:2 - Add a comma after "jeolousy".
  36. History(RIB)(EOTB):1:3 - After "the public's interest in them", remove "was only".
  37. History(RIB)(EOTB):2:1 - Did Lennon leave "between" August and September? Was it August or September...it only takes one day to leave.
  38. History(RIB)(EOTB):3 - Sentence should be merged into 2nd paragraph. A one sentence paragraph is not good.
  39. History(ESC):1:2 - What is the meaning of "underwhelming" in this context?
  40. OVERALL - The whole article doesn't seem very oragnized. Pieces of information are mentioned more than once and the chronological order of the article is not very good.
  41. OVERALL - This article will go nowhere without references. Inline citiations throughout the article would be most beneficial.
  42. OVERALL - Remove red-linked category.

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, AZ _t 15:28, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

• The following section called 'Achievements, world records, and miscellania' is a fancy name for nothing other than a trivia section. These are fine for articles in their early stages, but those that are at a further stage shouldn't have as such. If the information is relevant, please add it into an appropriate section in the article rather than lazily bunching it up all together in bullet points. Also, some of the paragraphs are stubby, which fails criterion 2. a. of "What is a featured article?", since some Wikipedians wish to get this to FA status - the trivia section will do plenty of harm to anyone's chances of achieving this. Also, certain sentences need the eye of a good copy editor.

• Also, I would say it fails in criterion 2. c. which asks for appropriate referencing and inline citations, of which there currently isn't enough. This shouldn't be hard to achieve since this is Paul McCartney - there should be tons of books / articles that can be cited. Any statements / opinions attributed as the words of McCartney himself should especially cite their sources.

• In short, treat the article as though someone reading it hasn't heard of the Beatles and McCartney. Any statements applauding his influence etc. should cite appropriate sources. LuciferMorgan 04:16, 24 July 2006 (UTC)