Wikipedia:Peer review/Kate Bush/archive1

Hi. We're trying to get this at least up to GA standard. Any advice would be very much appreciated. Thanks. Epbr123 22:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a couple quick comments:

Lead should be expanded to two paragraphs. Done
Songs should be in double quotes, albums in italics. Done
There are a lot of redlinked songs; unless articles are planned for all of the songs mentioned, they should probably be delinked. Done
There's some ridiculous overlinking in general; does Kate Bush's pet cat need its own article? Done
That said, some things (names of other artists, other bands' albums and songs, and so on) are underlinked. Done
The topmost image has been proposed for deletion (not by me). Done
Note 34 has been provided to support the statement "Bush tackled sensitive and taboo subjects long before it became fashionable to do so". The citation is from NME, which is known for its hyperbole, and I believe this is an instance of such exaggeration. It's been fashionable since (at least) the 1960s to talk about sensitive subjects in rock and avant garde music. Done
I keep finding little spots of bad copyediting - extra brackets where they don't belong, improper spacing, unclosed parentheses, etc. The grammar/punctuation/spelling/wikilinking should be spotless. Done
I would neutralize the POV in the "Musical Style" section, and expand it. There's a lot more that could and should be said there. Done
There's more POV in other sections - "Bush's technical mastery is shown to full effect" in 1983-87 is another instance. Done

Chubbles 19:47, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]