Talk:Voyeur (Kim Carnes album)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Sebbirrrr (talk · contribs) 23:20, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi there. I'll be reviewing this article as part of the current backlog drive.

Infobox

• Add alt for the cover
• You shouldn't have refs in the infobox
• The ref also doesn't state when the album was recorded

Lead

• The lead is very short, there's no mention of the people she worked with, the grammy award nomination or the commercial performance of the album (or its singles) and more info could be added on its background and composition

Writing and recording

• All paragraphs could be lumped into only one since they're not that long
• "where Kim Carnes" → "where she"
• Carnes' music was described as blending Ultravox and Spandau Ballet, they did not serve as inspirations for the album
• "The next track Carnes recorded" → this should be removed as it begins with "next", when no other track was mentioned beforehand
• The source does not state anything about Sue Saad and the Next or Crichton's film
• "a song that she wrote by herself" → not mentioned in the source
• I think it's worth mentioning why the children's choir was added
• Link "Voyeur" the single
• The source does not state when Turner demoed the song

Art direction

• Getty Images is an image vendor and should not be used as a reliable source
• The artwork description is original research
• Per the comments above, this section should be deleted unless reliable sources are found

Release and promotion

• The source does not give the album's release date
• De-link "Voyeur"
• There is no mention of the album's commercial performance
• The singles' release and their commercial performance should have their own section
• There's no source to back up "Voyeur"'s release date as a single
• Remove "chart" after Billboard Hot 100
• "charted in several European countries" → yet the source shows the song also charted in New Zealand
• IMVDb hosts user-generated content (according to them: "whether you a production company, director, or a fan, you can help IMVDb grow") which anyone can edit, thus it should not be used a source
• ""Breakin' Away from Sanity", "Undertow" and "Take It on the Chin" were released as singles in select territories but none charted" → WP:OR and there's no source to back up the fact that they were released as singles and where they were released as singles
• "Mulcahy directed another video for "Say You Don't Know Me", but the song was not released as a single" → WP:OR

Critical reception

• This section should be renamed to just Reception
• Link Mistaken Identity on the first occasion and its release year in brackets
• "In the New York Daily News, Hugh Wyatt" → "New York Daily News' Hugh Wyatt"
• "another album produced by Val Garay" link Val Garay
• "In the Calgary Herald, Roman Cooney" → "Roman Cooney, writing for the Calgary Herald"
• "that it is hard to determine" → "that it is "hard" to determine"

Industry awards

• This should go in the Reception section as it's just one sentence

Track listing

• Add that Val Garay produced all tracks

Personnel

• Everything is fine here

Charts

• Everything is fine here

Certifications

• Everything is fine here

References

• Copyvio score at 32.4%
• For ref 3, the interview begins at page 36
• Remove refs 5 and 10 per the comments above
• Refs 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 and 24 should be tagged with the via parameter for newspapers.com and url-access=subscription
• For ref 25, the page on where the grammy nomination is on is page 67

Outcome

• Sadly this is a  fail. The article contains original research and it needs more improvement and sources. The Writing and recording section is mostly based on one source, and it needs more than that. In the Release and promotion section, there is no mention of the album's chart performance and the gold certification it received, the information regarding the singles is also based on original research and lacks reliable sources. Best of luck, Sebbirrrr (talk) 10:24, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to review this, Sebbirrrr! It's a shame that the article doesn't meet GA requirements at this time but I agree with all your points and will set to work addressing each of them. Skyrack95 (talk) 15:38, 3 June 2022 (UTC)