Wikipedia:Peer review/Cheryl Cole/archive1

Cheryl Cole

This peer review discussion has been closed.

This article is currently listed as B class and I'm interested to find out what it might need to get it up to GA status, or perhaps even FAC, so I've listed it for peer review. The article is quite comprehensive and of reasonable length (currently 44kb), and well referenced with 103 sources cited at the time of writing. My only concern with it is that it can sometimes be unstable and tends to attract controversy and conflict from time to time.

Thanks, Paul Largo (talk) 15:36, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Comments from Belovedfreak

It's definitely on the right tracks. I think in terms of prose, the article could do with a thorough copyedit by someone not heavily involved with it. It can be hard to look at language objectively when you're doing a lot of work on it, and articles like this one, that see a lot of edits by a lot of people, can easily end up with prose problems. I'll focus more on other things here - MOS, sources etc, but I'll point out any glaring prose issues I notice. Look out for repetition of words, eg. repetition of "she also", repetition of "Cole", when a pronoun could be used. Here are some things I picked up on:

Lead section

• The lead should summarise the article and contain nothing that's not in the article. Therefore, it shouldn't be necessary to have the amount of citations that are currently in the lead because any statements there will be backed up in the article. That said, for anything controversial or contentious, that is likely to be challenged, a citation in the lead would be needed. You don't need citations in the lead for sentences like "Cole rose to fame in 2002 after becoming a member of pop group Girls Aloud through ITV's reality television programme Popstars: The Rivals." for example.
• The first and last sentence standing alone make it look choppy; there's no need to have a line break after the first sentence.

"They have become one of the few UK reality television acts to achieve continued success, amassing a fortune of £25 million by May 2009" - this isn't mentioned later on in the article

• "Propelling her fame to new heights" - this is not neutral, encyclopedic language, regardless of the cited quote that follows. Also, while it may be true that she has been called the nation's sweetheart, it's not clear who has called her that, or why it's significant. The lead doesn't come across as entirely neutral; for someone not familiar with Cole, it would seem that she is universally popular, which is not true.
• "It was reported on 24 February 2010 that the couple are to separate" - this is a little vague, time-wise. It makes me wonder if they have separated, or if they are still together but planning to separate very soon.
• In general, the lead section needs expanding as, at the moment, it doesn't adequately summarise the whole article.

Early life

• "the elder child of Gary Tweedy" - does that mean the eldest? Is it known how many children he has?
• "split up" is a bit informal
• "bonniest baby" could do with quotation marks
• is there any information on education or any jobs she had prior to Popstars?

Career

• You could explain a little about Popstars, the "battle of the sexes" format, make it clear that Cole auditioned alone and the group was formed later as part of the series, and that Girls Aloud won the "battle"
• the Girls Aloud section could be a bit longer, summarising the main article a bit more. The group was a big part of Cole's early career & fame.
• "Girls Aloud hold the record for the shortest time between formation and reaching number one." - this statement needs a citation
• say who will.i.am is - just something like "American rapper will.i.am"
• Passions of Girls Aloud is suddenly mentioned; it's not clear what this is
• "In April 2009, it was confirmed..." - language like this sounds more like a press update than an encyclopedia article, keep it simple, like "In April 2009, Cole started working on solo material". The same applies later when you have "it was revealed"
• "escaping the media after the breakup of her marriage" - needs a citation; not 100% neutral. Is there WP:RS evidence that the media was hounding her, or was this just her take on it?
• "she revealed..." - again, inappropriate tone. Most of the time, there's nothing wrong with saying simply "she said", or "she stated". Try to avoid putting any kind of emotional or interpretative spin on things. This section is particularly "revealing": "it was revealed... She revealed that she hoped ... Cole also revealed plans ... She has also revealed..." - that's four consecutive sentences!

The X-Factor

• it's perhaps worth mentioning the similarity of the show to Popstars/Pop Idol since Cole made her name in Pop Stars, the link between the different shows is relevant.
• "Cole was given the girls category" - make it a little clearer what this means for people who don't watch the X-Factor.
• "ending up as the victorious judge" - not very neutral. I know that's how they play it on the show, but really, it's Burke who won it. I'm not saying don't mention that Cole's group won, but make it a bit more neutral.
• "girls" and "boys" categories could do with quotes. The contestants are over 16, and most (?) of them are adults so it would be strange to call them boys & girls; therefore make it clear that that's what the show calls the groups.
• With regard to Simon Cowell's comments about Cole, I don't think that the "one of the best I've ever worked with." is necessary. It's a bit vague and it's hard to tell the context (especially as the link is dead). It makes me wonder, one of the best what? Judges? Singers? The most professional? The most fun? Or is it just a throwaway line as part of X-Factor publicity? The other comments are good, because they are relevant and are to do with the way she is as a judge, how she talks to people etc.
• Make it clear what Cheryl Cole's Night In is - fly on the wall documentary? A talkshow?
• The Girls Aloud TV bit seems a bit tacked on the end, maybe would be better in the Girls Aloud section.

Books

• This section reads like it's there to promote the books
• Is there any more news about the novels she's going to write? That bit's form a year ago, it would be good if there as more recent info.

Personal life

• You don't need to give all the various names of the nightclub that she had an altercation in.
• "Cole claimed" - "said" or "stated" would be more neutral
• "in a rare interview" - who says it's rare? Sounds a bit tabloid-y. Given that that sentence summarises the following quote, it's not needed anyway. Start the paragraph with "In an interview with Q magazine..." This paragraph may also go into a bit too much detail (WP:UNDUE). What we really need to know is that "an incident happened, she was accused of X and Y, she was convicted of X, acquitted of Y and was sentenced to Z. She later said... " I don't think you need the three sentences starting with "At the time of the incident Cole..."
• "Cole began dating..." the term "dating" sounds American
• "They signed an exclusive deal with OK!, reportedly worth £1 million" - reportedly? Either it was worth that or it wasn't. If we don't know, don't include it.
• The rest of this personal life section has a tabloid tinge to it. For one thing, I think there's too much detail about who alleged what and claimed what. I think it's all relevant, but could be summarised better. The article's about Cole, and in a limited way, Ashley Cole, so focus on how she dealt with things that happened, not the other people involved. The language needs to be toned down (eg. "news broke"). Try to imagine this is an article about someone who lived 200 years ago. Which bits would be relevant?
• The bit about her political views suddenly appears in the middle of her relationship problems. I realise this is because it's chronological, but it would be better to separate that out and place it after the breakup of her marriage.

Recognition

• neutral point of view is an issue here: "revered as a fashionista", "graced the cover"
• Is modelling a significant part of her career? If so, it should be covered there rather than as "recognition".

References

• Citation formats need some work, there are some bare URLs, some are missing all the relevant information, some aren't formatted correctly

General

• There are some dead links
• The article is fairly broad, but see if you can get any more information. For example, is there more information that could be added from Dreams that Glitter? Has she had any success abroad, or has she any plans to break into overseas markets?

Hope these comments help. --BelovedFreak 17:40, 20 April 2010 (UTC)