Talk:One Direction/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: TBrandley (talk · contribs) 23:06, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Issues:

Lede: Which X Factor series is it? UK, U.S.?

The british version (which they were on) is the orginal, Better now? AdabowtheSecond (talk) 13:19, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lede: One Direction have been described as sparking a resurgence in the boy band concept → One Direction has been described as sparking a resurgence in the boy band concept. Has rather than have

Done AdabowtheSecond (talk) 13:19, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Awards and nominations: Although it is linked to main article List of awards and nominations received by One Direction. Information could still be there. Example 1: One Direction has been nominated for 3 MuchMusic Video Awards. That is just example

I have placed it in the One Direction#See also section now like Lady Gaga#See also article AdabowtheSecond (talk) 13:19, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References: Ref. 2 - This uses different date format than other. This uses 2012-05-11, but others would be like this May 11, 2012. Please stick to one method format for references
References: Ref. 4 & 7 & 15 & 97, various others - # 4 is italic for Digital Spy and # 7, # 15 isn't. Please make it italic on # 7. Again, stick to one method format.
References: Ref. 14 - Same ref uses different method for each part. Stick to one!
References: Various - Please stick to one method
References: Ref. 112 - Digitalspy.co.uk → Digital Spy

Again, stick to one format. Good work otherwise. On hold. TBran dl ey 23:24, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm will now work on the refs, thanks for your time AdabowtheSecond (talk) 13:19, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The review is not complete. There are many other problems regarding the references. Till 06:41, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for noting. There are tons including:

References: Don't need area for "Sources for Edwards and Malik relationship"
References: Don't need area for "Sources for Payne and Peazer relationship"
References: Don't need area for "Sources for Tomlinson and Calder relationship"
References: Ref. 123 - Make Digital Spy italic like this Digital Spy
References: Various ref needs linking in section
References: Ref. 161 - "BBC - Harry Styles has got the X Factor in Holmes Chapel" → "Harry Styles has got the X Factor in Holmes Chapel"
References: Various formatting. Please stick to one. Please check for more than just above.

Thanks, TBran dl ey 16:24, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have converted all the refs AdabowtheSecond (talk) 20:51, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

now there are two kinds of refs for example;

^ Sophie Freeman (19 November 2010). "Now Treyc Cohen snubbed by X Factor for £100,000 tour... but reject Aiden Grimshaw IS invited". UK: Daily Mail. Retrieved 19 November 2010. ^ ^ "No Change Of Direction". Chart track. 7 October 2012. Retrieved 31 March 2012.

this is because when a article/ref doesn't give an author in the article the date goes; "7 October 2012. Retrieved 31 March 2012." but when a an author is given its like this; "Sophie Freeman (19 November 2010). "Now Treyc Cohen snubbed by X Factor for £100,000 tour... but reject Aiden Grimshaw IS invited". UK: Daily Mail. Retrieved 19 November 2010."

Most of the references are missing publishers. Digital Spy shouldn't be in italics, it's a website. Till 01:50, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

is that necessary Katy Perry article passed GA and their are barely publishers given AdabowtheSecond (talk) 02:26, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Katy Perry article might have to be reassessed. The references are a mess. Till 02:33, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I might go into a hefty denial right now spent hours converting refs and now this *sigh eating chocolate ice cream now*, how long do is still have to add publishers and all AdabowtheSecond (talk) 02:53, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ref. #1 --> Publisher is Intent Media.
Ref. #2 --> Daily Mirror in italics, and Trinity Mirror shouldn't be in italics. Also, you can remove the 'London' bit. It's not needed.
Ref. #3 --> Work is Digital Spy (it shouldn't be in italics) and publisher is Hachette Filipacchi Médias. ---> it isn't Hachetter anymore as per wiki page "On 1 August 2011, ownership of Hachette UK was sold to Hearst Magazines UK".
Ref. #4 --> Publisher is Wenner Media.
Ref. #6 --> Publisher is Media Wales
Ref #7 --> same as #3
Ref #8 --> STV shouldn't be in italics, and publisher is STV Group.
Ref #9 --> Link The Guardian, and the publisher is Guardian Media Group.
Ref #10 --> Link The Sun, and publisher is News International.

See what I mean? The references really need work. I'm not going to go through every single one. Btw the article needs to be trimmed down to a readable size. Till 03:04, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

the former i have just trimmed severly today what do yuo suggest needs trimming. AdabowtheSecond (talk) 03:23, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have to remove most of the information about Muslim in Zayn's section. It's not relevant, and violates WP:WWIN. The same goes for Liam getting bullied. Till 03:26, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Kari Huus from msnbc.com, felt it is, "likely to alienate some conservative Muslims and [that it] has already sparked the wrath of at least one well known anti-Muslim conservative in the US." Nevertheless Wajahat Ali, a San Francisco-based screenwriter who is a practicing Muslim, felt Malik represents progress. "It is empowering for Muslims worldwide to see the success of a pop star who also happens to be Muslim. It sends that message that a person can be respected for their talent, and their "Musliminess" will not exclude them from the public arena and culture," said Ali. "It's also good business. You have a Muslim in a five-person boy band… and you have captured an audience of Muslim girls worldwide." Zudhi Jasser, an American Muslim who frequently warns of Islamic radicalization, commented, "I would say all the power to him to be respectful to his faith and be proud of it," said Jasser. But he also notes that conservative Islamists would likely frown on many aspects of Malik's behavior — his smoking, tattoos, ear piercings, and song lyrics — that "while saccharine — probably would not be seen to glorify God." The screenwriter said that even if more conservative Muslims do not agree with Malik's behavior, he could help expand the artistic boundaries for young Muslims. "What we have seen in the last 10 years is that you can be an artist who is Muslim and can be practicing and doing art that is inspired by your beliefs, but does not have to be overtly Islamic or using religious language," he said. "A guy like Zayn Malik can really help open those minds and convey that as a generation we are moving ahead."[149]" This whole thing has to go. Commentary from editors isn't needed here. Till 03:28, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for you help with the review, Till. Thanks again! --TBran dl ey 04:25, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

:). Till 08:43, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"he eventually found his place on the cross country running team, coming first "From then on I was training all the time and getting up at 6am to run for miles. At the age of 12 they put me in the school's under-18s team."[133]"
"saying he "needed to find a way to defend myself, I was, at 12 years old, fighting the 38-year-old trainer. I broke my nose, had a perforated eardrum and I was always coming home with a bruised, puffy face. But it gave me confidence. I got pretty good over the next couple of years."
"In 2011, he commented, "I went and told my parents and my teachers, but it [the bullying] didn't stop so I had to sort it out myself. I was in year eight and they were sixth-formers. I got this guy I knew, who was in his early twenties, to pretend to be my big brother and pick me up from school."[150] In 2012, in an interview with The New Zealand Herald on advocating how to deal with bullying, Payne stated, "you have to tell someone", adding "you have to stand up to it, you make yourself a target, you make yourself easy to be picked on and just let things happen, that's what happens, but when you do something, you're active about it, you make sure something's being done about it then it will slowly stop."[151]"

These also need removal. It's reading like a diary. Till 08:43, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i'm back! So how many days left do i have to fix all this??? AdabowtheSecond (talk) 19:28, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

so i added publisher to every ref anymore violations `AdabowtheSecond (talk) 23:50, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Everything looks good :D just be sure to make the online sources (such as MTV and STV) to not be in italics, as they are not newspapers. But all the others look good. Till 01:19, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. TBran dl ey 01:20, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yaymeee :D AdabowtheSecond (talk) 01:25, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for chiming in, but I wonder if there's a guide somewhere about that publisher vs work thing in references. I can't seem to find any and I don't fully grasp the concept, what goes in "publisher" and what goes in "work"?--Krystaleen 08:08, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

go to the magazine, websites wikipedia page it says under which publishing company it runs AdabowtheSecond (talk) 12:48, 1 July 2012 (UTC)L[reply]

Sorry for hold up. It will pass now. TBran dl ey 17:06, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

;D thanks for your time. AdabowtheSecond (talk) 17:19, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]