Eisspeedway

Talk:Lizzie Esau

Page development

Hey again @Launchballer! Here's another really great artist that I have no idea why I haven't made a page for yet, have seen her live supporting James Marriott and Swim School, amazing every time! There's some great sources talking about her which i have pre-added to the article for you to have a look at so thought a page for her could be good! George (talk) 22:54, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Georgeykiwi: I forgot to point out that ever since my David Fishwick DYK timed out, I've been waiting until after they've finished there to nominate them for GA just in case. (I have two quite old multi-noms at T:TDYKA that might do that.) I'm assuming you've seen Piri & Tommy's show at Corsica Studios next month - do you plan on going? (And if so, do you know if they have seats, because I'm 240kg...)--Launchballer 18:38, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah okay. I’m not sure how DYK works to be honest. Yeah I do have a ticket for the show! I do believe it’s just ‘general admission’ though & i’ve looked at the venue online and it looks like standing only unfortunately. George (talk) 20:22, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by JuniperChill talk 23:15, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lizzie Esau in 2024.
Lizzie Esau in 2024.
Created by Launchballer (talk) and Georgeykiwi (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 254 past nominations.

Launchballer 09:03, 18 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.
Overall: Meets the size and time(well, for when it was nominated), has a healthy collection of reliable sources (although I am personally more skeptical by default of magazine sources like this, I think they're good here after a quick check over of WP:V, and a requested second glance.) Personally, I'll strongly push for ALT2, since ALT0 does not pass WP:DYKINT in my view, and ALT1 is borderline. Anyways, thanks @Launchballer: PixDeVl yell talk to me! 21:19, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Can y'all...

Can y'all please fill this article out with sourced stuff about why Lizzie is significant? I'm deleting where she grew up from the lead, for instance. Read some other articles about musicians and you'll get what I mean. Thanks. Billyshiverstick (talk) 00:36, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Lizzie Esau/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Launchballer (talk · contribs) 00:55, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Royiswariii (talk · contribs) 01:50, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Review

Launchballer, Georgeykiwi I'll ping you again if I complete the review and if needs to be address. ROY is WAR Talk! 01:59, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria

Good Article Status - Review Criteria
Further information: WP:WIAGA

A good article is—

  1. Well-written:
    2. (a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
    (b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.[1]
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    3. (a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
    (b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);[2]
    (c) it contains no original research; and
    (d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    4. (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;[3] and
    (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
    6. [4]
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    7. [5]
    (a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
    (b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.[6]

Notes

  1. ^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
  2. ^ Footnotes must be used for in-line citations.
  3. ^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
  4. ^ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
  5. ^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
  6. ^ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.

Review

  1. Well-written:
    2. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (prose) add her stage name On hold On hold
    (b) (MoS) All are passed on MOS:BLP Pass Pass
  2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
    3. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (references) All references are not archived, please archive it using IABot. On hold On hold
    (b) (citations to reliable sources) a red flag using X as sources, X are not reliable per WP:RSPX. Please find a secondary and reliable sources. Also, In Discography, Spotify are not reliable too. Please use Apple Music instead. Fail Fail
    (c) (original research) No WP:OR founded. Pass Pass
    (d) (copyvio and plagiarism) No copyvio founded, automatically passed. Pass Pass
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    4. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (major aspects) This is passed since there's no other off topic on the adticle. Pass Pass
    (b) (focused) per (a) criteria. Pass Pass
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
    5. Notes Result
    I don't see anything wrong on the grammar or spelling. Note: It might changes with notice if I spotted wrong Pass Pass
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
    6. Comment Result
    Relatively new and no sign of edit warring or ongoing Pass Pass
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    7. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales) Image in the infobox is passed Pass Pass
    (b) (appropriate use with suitable captions) Have an WP:ALTTEXT, so passed. Pass Pass

Result

Result Notes
On hold On hold Launchballer and Georgeykiwi, please addressed all my suggestions and cocnerns. Please ping me if done, and please reply only on Discussion section.

Discussion

@Royiswariii: I have replaced Twitter and run IABot on the article, although I fail to see the difference between Spotify and Apple Music.--Launchballer 14:07, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also noting that your suggestion that her stage name be added to this article directly contravenes MOS:HYPOCORISM, although I see @Georgeykiwi: just added it to the article.--Launchballer 23:23, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm gonna assume it doesn't really apply for musicians as basically every singer with a stage name has this change George (talk) 00:02, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Launchballer, The ref 3 is not reliable per WP:RSPIG. This is my last suggestion and I can pass this article. ROY is WAR Talk! 02:24, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:RSPIG cites WP:SOCIALMEDIA, which expressly allows that use.--Launchballer 02:37, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
is there any supporting secondary sources? ROY is WAR Talk! 15:19, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that source is there for November and there's a secondary source for which November, which I've spelt out in the Notes section. WP:DOB says "A verified social media account of an article subject saying about themselves something along the lines of "today is my 50th birthday" may fall under self-published sources for purposes of reporting a full date of birth. It may be usable if there is no reason to doubt it.[4]", where [4] links to Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons/Archive 48#Tweets announcing "Happy birthday to me! I'm 21 today!", where a consensus was formed that this is okay.--Launchballer 15:49, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Quelle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Lizzie_Esau