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

Reviewer: Jonathanischoice (talk · contribs) 22:20, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I'll review this later over the next day or so, and build up a GA review template below as I go. A very quick read indicates to me that it may be too short, but I need to clarify for myself the tension between GA coverage requirements and topics that do not have a lot of sources (i.e. we should avoid length for length's sake!). I'd also like to know if Fragrantica is a reliable source, which if not, at least contains information which may be useful as a starting point for further research.^[1] Please note that I am relatively new to the GA review process, so bear with me. Cheers! — Jon (talk) 22:20, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Colin M: I'm starting a review now; I will probably make several edits over the next day or so, adding comments as I go, and then I'll let you know at the end and give us some time to fix any issues that come up. I'm slightly concerned that we haven't heard from you since 18 May, but I'll press on regardless! Summary table below will be filled in as we make progress. — Jon (talk) 10:06, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Colin M: after doing a thorough review and talking to a more experienced reviewer, I'm failing this review due mainly to insufficient scope and detail.—Jon (talk) 20:28, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Use of spellings like "advertised", "theatres" and "popularized" indicate an inconsistent use of English variants, and no Use English template is specified. Otherwise the article is clear and easy to read.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Some minor issues to fix in the lead section, see below.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	The references are from reliable sources, cover the material, and are not controversial.
	2b. 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).	See reference notes, below.
	2c. it contains no original research.	Material is covered in the references.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	I'm satisfied with a Copyvio score of 10.7% and the detected snippets are either cited quotes or names of products or organisations.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	There is no mention of the perfumer Carlos Benaim, and nothing much about its development; perhaps some more background of Taylor's previous work in cosmetics, to provide some context.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	I think we have the opposite problem; compared to other GA perfume articles, this article is thin on detail.[2]
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Article is free from weasel wording and contentious statements.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	The article has not suffered from any disputes. It is too new to have much in the talk page and the history appears to be free of conflicts.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	The single image has a valid Flickr Commons FUR and tagged as no known copyright restrictions. I've since uploaded and added a low-resolution product image under logo FUR.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	I've added an image of the perfume itself to match the ones in infoboxes in other perfume GAs.[2] (passing this now)
	7. Overall assessment.	Overall the article is a good start, with room for some quick improvements (see comments and suggestions below), but lacks the scope and detail of similar perfume GAs.[2]

• I think even though it's by no means mandatory, we really ought to use the {{Infobox fragrance}} template here (and try and source a good image of the product from somewhere, see below). It is used in the obvious and famous Chanel No. 5, but also the other GA perfume articles.^[2]
• The disambiguation template {{Other uses}} points, ironically, to a redirect and should be updated to point to White Diamond.
• Maintenance tags for flavour of English and dates are not specified; see Category:Use English templates, and {{Use dmy dates}} / {{Use mdy dates}}.
• Link perfume.
• Introduce Liz Taylor from her lead, e.g. "British-American actress"
• "sales of $1.5 billion" — I assume that's USD, but we should be explicit for all the non-Americans out there.
• The lead is short and does not summarise the characteristics of the perfume itself.

• Elizabeth Arden should be linked a paragraph earlier ("CEO of Elizabeth Arden").
• There is no mention of the perfumer Carlos Benaim (Fragrantica source(?) or elsewhere).

• Link to more of the notes - e.g. rose, narcissus, etc.

• Link either or both marketing / advertising campaign, short film, television commercial.
• Use correct currency (presumably USD).

• link black-and-white, poker

• Use correct currency (presumably USD).
• The opening is potentially confusing - total sales up to 2018, then much smaller sales figures for 1993 and 2010 are quoted separately, are they totals or annual amounts sold just in that year?

• No mention of the 30-year anniversary release in 2021 of "White Diamonds Legacy".^[3]
• Rename this section, and there could be more detail about the different packaging sizes, strengths (eau de parfum, eau de toilette), variations (en Rouge, Sparkling, etc.), collections (Diamonds and Sapphires, Diamonds and Emeralds, etc.) and so on.

• The book Hijacking the Runway is used in several places, but we need the page(s) referred to. Although not required for GA, listing the book in a separate Bibliography section (for example, see below) and then using {{sfn}} short notes, like this,^[4] is helpful to the reader when using a source more than once but with different pages. The book is also in the Internet Archive, here, which would be useful in the citation. ({{Cite Q}} is also not required for GA, I just used it here in the example because I think it is awesome!)
• Paywalled sources (e.g. NYT) require url-access=subscription in the cite template, and ideally archive-url as well, which can be done with the internet archive bot.

• Agins, Tori (2014). Hijacking the Runway: How Celebrities Are Stealing the Spotlight from Fashion Designers. New York: Gotham Books. ISBN 978-0-698-16215-0. OL 18010126W. Wikidata Q121087265.