Wikipedia:Peer review/Leah LaBelle/archive3

Leah LaBelle

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion is closed.

Hello. I have listed this article for peer review because I am hoping to nominate it for FA in the future and welcome any comments to make that process smoother. This would be the first biography article that I take to the FAC level and I am quite nervous about that so I wanted to get as much feedback as possible here prior to trying that. Thanks,

• See User:Trappist the monk/HarvErrors.js for harv errors; there's one in the article

• Thank you for the link! I have only recently started to use this citation style so it is greatly appreciated. I really need to learn more about tools like this. I would have kept reading over my mistake without it.
  Aoba47 (talk) 18:28, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Thank you for double-check this.
  Aoba47 (talk) 18:22, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Thank you for checking. I could not find further resources on this, but I think there is a language barrier at play here. I would also imagine that coverage about them could be restricted to print sources given the time they were active.
  Aoba47 (talk) 18:22, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Even in Bulgarian I can't find much. (Not that it'd help since I don't read it.) Probably an issue of time and print media, yes. Urve (talk) 19:10, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you for looking.
  Aoba47 (talk) 19:22, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• I have cited the YouTube channel as that explicitly mentions the date she created it. I must have accidentally deleted the source that covers the industry contact part. I have added it back in. Thank you for noticing this.
  Aoba47 (talk) 18:22, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Could you explain what you mean by this? The chart positions are cited in both the prose and the table.
  Aoba47 (talk) 18:24, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Thanks. The tabular reference is for another song unless I'm misunderstanding something. But it's cited in the prose, so that works for me. If it will work for FAC folks, I have no idea. Urve (talk) 19:10, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• I double-checked the citations used in the table and they all go to the appropriate sources for me (with the song title and chart position in the citation). If possible, could you clarify which reference you are referring to?
  Aoba47 (talk) 19:19, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Just for clarification, the citations for the chart positions are on the top of the table underneath the chart title. The citation for "What Do We Got To Lose?" is there to support that it was a single since it did not appear on any charts.
  Aoba47 (talk) 19:21, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Oh! Mea culpa. Okay, I did not see the refs underneath the headings. Works just fine, thanks for clarifying. Urve (talk) 19:29, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• No worries!
  Aoba47 (talk) 20:32, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• I agree that commas just looks better as well. I am pretty bad with commas so I am not sure if they are necessary or not either, but I have added them anyway.
  Aoba47 (talk) 18:24, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

All for now. It looks good to me Urve (talk) 04:45, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• @
  Aoba47 (talk) 18:29, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• NP. Will take a look soon again. Urve (talk) 19:10, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you.
  Aoba47 (talk) 19:19, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Added.
  Aoba47 (talk) 17:33, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Revised.
  Aoba47 (talk) 17:33, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• You are correct. Revised.
  Aoba47 (talk) 17:33, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Revised.
  Aoba47 (talk) 17:33, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• You are correct. Thank you for pointing this out. Revised.
  Aoba47 (talk) 17:35, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• That is a very good point. After some research, I can only say that he is a rapper with absolute certain. I would ideally like to add his nationality, but I am not completely certain.
  Aoba47 (talk) 17:35, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• I have used "provided" instead. You are right that "did" sounds rather odd here.
  Aoba47 (talk) 17:35, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• It might be better to make the {{Commons category}} inline like this: {{Commons category-inline}}

• Thank you for the recommendation. I have revised that part with your suggestion. I am not that experienced with that kind of thing so I appreciate it.
  Aoba47 (talk) 17:35, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

That's all from me. Excellent work on the article, it is very well-written and well-formatted. Good luck with the FAC. :) --Ashleyyoursmile! 07:12, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• @
  Aoba47 (talk) 17:36, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Glad to hear that I was able to help. I hope you have a great weekend as well. :) --Ashleyyoursmile! 03:21, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you. I enjoy working with you, and feel free to message me anytime if you need help on any project (and I will at least try my best to help).
  Aoba47 (talk) 03:54, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Looks detailed and generally well-written, but I noticed that each sections read more like a magazine article with inclusion of quotes in every paragraph. I've learned from mentors who had done peer reviews for BLPs to limit quotations as much as possible and only when it is necessary. Lady Gaga, Taylor Swift or Mariah Carey would be good examples for structure and stylistics.

• In the lead: 'she was a finalist on the third season of American Idol. After placing twelfth in the season finals' - perhaps the second sentence can be fused to first --> 'she was a finalist on the third season of American Idol, placing twelfth in the finals.' Then start with when she got to Berklee and mention the year she started attending.

• Revised.
  Aoba47 (talk) 15:03, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Revised.
  Aoba47 (talk) 15:03, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Revised.
  Aoba47 (talk) 15:03, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Revised.
  Aoba47 (talk) 15:03, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Revised.
  Aoba47 (talk) 15:03, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• That is true. I have removed this sentence. She does mention the producer (
  Aoba47 (talk) 15:03, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Revised.
  Aoba47 (talk) 15:06, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Revised. Apologies for these silly errors.
  Aoba47 (talk) 15:06, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• No worries, that's why it's always nice to have a few set of extra eyes :) Pseud 14 (talk) 15:30, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• The standalone-single, "Lolita" --> not sure what a standalone single is, could be non-album single or promotional single? perhaps we can just refer to it as a 'single'

• If possible, I would prefer to use standalone-single. It is something used in articles like the
  Aoba47 (talk) 15:11, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Works for me, I was probably used to the conventional "single" terminologies (e.g. non-album, promotional, charity). Thanks for clarifying. Pseud 14 (talk) 15:30, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• That is a good point. I will have to think on it more. It is best to use terminology that it is the most conventional so more readers can understand it and so it will hopefully keep things consistent across more and more articles on here. You actually are convincing me with your response so thank you for taking the time to do so.
  Aoba47 (talk) 17:05, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Revised.
  Aoba47 (talk) 15:06, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Revised.
  Aoba47 (talk) 15:06, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Hope the above is helpful. Very minor stuff that I listed. Have not gone through the other comments so I apologize if there would be repetition. Reading through it, I think it could benefit a copy-edit from GOCE, only if you're not in a hurry to put this up to FAC. It would help in the flow and structure of the article. But I will leave that up to you. Pseud 14 (talk) 01:27, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• @
  Aoba47 (talk) 15:13, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• @
  Aoba47: Glad I could help in some way. Agreed, sometimes I'm unsure if the copy-edit makes it better or worse. And by that I mean, you don't know what you're getting come FAC process post c/e, and copy-editors sometimes don't share the same perspective as FAC reviewers, so you're torn which way to go, as it almost certainly comes down to personal preferences of how prose or MOS should be. Good luck with your first BLP! Surely with your experience it will go well during the nomination process. Enjoy the rest of your week as well! Pseud 14 (talk) 15:30, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Thank you for the kind words! To be clear, a majority of my experiences with the GOCE have been positive so I do feel bad for saying anything negative. I agree completely with what you say about this. It really does come down to personal preference. It is super exciting to go at least a little outside of my comfort zone for a change. And you have help to improve the article immensely. Feel free to contact me anything if you need any help with anything and I will try my best to do so.
  Aoba47 (talk) 17:07, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• File:Leah Labelle 2012.png is A-OK to use
• With no evidence to the contrary, I'll assume good faith that File:JamesAGarfield HS 2.jpg is indeed the uploader's own work as claimed
• While I don't see any copyright issues with File:Leah LaBelle at Crocodile Cafe, Seattle, October 2013.jpg, it has a subpar angle of her face. Try to get one where she's facing more towards the camera.

I'll assess the prose later. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 14:43, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you for looking through the images. That has always been my weakest point. Unfortunately, I only have one alternative image (
  Aoba47 (talk) 18:08, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]