Wikipedia:Peer review/Cardi B/archive1

Cardi B

I've listed this article for peer review because several editors on the talk page have said the article leans very positive in regards to tone, which fails our neutrality policy. A peer review to get a wider opinion might be useful in fixing content issues whilst avoiding the drama that typically happens in these "this article is biased" type discussions.

Thanks, shanghai.^{talk to me} 13:53, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Comments by Cornerstonepicker

• I went ahead and edited the lead section and joined paragraphs: it sounds better now. Maybe the problem was the way the records were presented in prose. Each release comes with several records, so the wording needed some order there. Other than that, I don't see any issue; the article largely avoids phrases like "it's the most influential", nor tries to push POV. I like the inclusion of "among women in hip hop" instead of repeating "first female rapper".
• I saw the inclusion of "the only [ ] to achieve number ones in two decades" was bothering your analysis experience, but Entertainment Weekly marked it up as a notable record for her, and it is actually quite a milestone as she's entering her sixth year in the mainstream scene. Noticing other records are being left out of the lead section, like longest-charting album / most Apple Music number ones, but maybe it would make the intro just thicker—the selection there is ok. It's worth noting that your removal of "songwriter" and the artists' music genres is not helpful for the page, as both are sourced for its notability. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 13:32, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

  @Cornerstonepicker:, Given that you have 47.3% primary authorship of this article, maybe it wouldn't be the most appropriate for you to comment specifically on the tone and bias issues that other editors have pointed out? That's not what peer review is for. You also completely reverted the attempts I made to make this BLP sound more neutral to the diff before I edited it. Additionally, I like the inclusion of "among women in hip hop" instead of repeating "first female rapper" is a poor WP:ILIKEIT-type argument and why say Apple Music number ones belong in her lead despite that you have removed content in other articles that pertains to charts that only deal with a single vendor? Is that not WP:POVPUSH?

  I'm also noticing you are going to other editor's talk pages and casting aspersions regarding myself calling me a "fan" while you are pushing for more of Cardi's records to be included in her lead. This may have contributed to multiple editors pointing out the overly positive and fan-like tone of this article. shanghai.^{talk to me} 07:27, 3 January 2022 (UTC)