Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:28, 16 March 2014

Sakis Rouvas received a peer review by Misplaced Pages editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Biography: Actors and Filmmakers / Musicians This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers (assessed as Mid-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (assessed as Mid-importance). Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Electronic music Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electronic music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electronic music on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Electronic musicWikipedia:WikiProject Electronic musicTemplate:WikiProject Electronic musicelectronic music Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Eurovision Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Eurovision, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Eurovision-related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EurovisionWikipedia:WikiProject EurovisionTemplate:WikiProject EurovisionEurovision Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Fashion Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FashionWikipedia:WikiProject FashionTemplate:WikiProject Fashionfashion Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Greece High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. R&B and Soul Music Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject R&B and Soul Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of R&B and Soul Music articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.R&B and Soul MusicWikipedia:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicTemplate:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicR&B and Soul Music Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Rock music Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Template:WikiProject The X Factor

Archives

1: November 2007–August 2009

This article has been mentioned by a media organization: Staff Reporter (27 July 2011). "Μακάβρια ανάρτηση της Misplaced Pages για τον Σάκη Ρουβά!". Agelioforos.

To-do: E · H · W · RUpdated 2010-01-15 Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Copyedit : Throughout entire article Expand : 1997 Cyprus peace concert

	Guild of Copy Editors
This article was copy edited by Miniapolis, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 11 February 2014.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors

Married?

OK, seeing as how prior to my edits there was a claim that he got married in a civil ceremony (or something) in August/08, I went along with it, but now I am actually starting to doubt this. I never actually heard him say "I got married" or wtv and he also said that marriage was not in his plans for the time being. He could possibly mean that he and Zygouli have not yet had a church ceremony and don't plan to, so as he follows Greek Orthodoxy devoutly, they would not be married by religious standards, however, the marriage would still be legal. Civil ceremonies are often done in Greece with eligitimate children involved, esp. for the reason of surname, but I haven't been able to find a single reliable source to ref this claim. This would be reason enough to remove the claim from the article, but in interviews, etc. Greek media often describes them as being married or they call Zygouli his wife. If anybody knows anything, please help! :S GreekStar12 (talk) 16:50, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

FA/GA review

I think that this article is ready for a FA or GA review, since that'll tell us what needs to be fixed up with it anyway. GreekStar12 (talk) 18:13, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

A GA review first would follow the general pattern and will present us with plenty of suggestions so fix up the page. Going straight to an FA review might be overwhelming since its guidelines are much stricter. You may however, wish to do am FA so that you don't do lots of stuff that is okay for a GA, but not for an FA. Either way, the waiting list for reviews is long, so I would suggest adding the page for whichever type of review you wish to take on. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 18:38, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Have the items on the to do list to the right been taken care of? That's a quick sign for the reviewer that the article isn't ready, so it should be updated or removed depending on its status. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 18:40, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

General issues

OK so these are some small things I noticed that often have circular edits or inconsistencies:

1. Club/venue/organizations names should not be italicized, they are places, not titles, nor should they be put in quotes.
2. Make sure all album/film titles are consistently italicized throughout, and songs in quotes.
3. We should translate Greek titles consistently, but only once.
4. OK, so this one is all over the place: should translated titles (in brackets) be lower case or all upper case like proper titles?
5. Also, should translated (bracket) titles of albums be italicized and ones of songs in quotations, or should they just be left plain since they are only translations?
6. Occupations in the infobox, as well as birthdate should not be linked, nor should most things in the lead, since it is a summary of words found in the body; make sure things in the body are only linked once.
7. Commas, periods, etc. should be placed inside the end quotation mark. GreekStar12 (talk) 09:12, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Title translations should be lowercase because they are not proper nouns. Not sure whether they should be italicized, but they should be in parenthesis(), not brackets. As for occupations being linked, words should only be linked once per section, not per article. Dates and years should not be linked at all. Commas, periods, etc should not be placed inside the end quotation mark as they are not part of the quote. Regarding the last part, there is no "official" way to do it in English grammar, so I tend to use the way that makes the most sense logically. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 15:17, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

BTW periods etc should be placed inside the quotation marks. it's really basic English grammatic rules. GreekStar12 (talk) 06:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Wrong. It's editors choice as proper grammar rules contradict each other. Therefore it should be common sense. Quotations are word for word, so unless the period, comma, etc are part of the quotation, they should be placed outside. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 07:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Too many wikiprojects

WikiProject Dance: A few Wikipedians have gotten together to make some suggestions about how we might organize data in articles about Dance. Here are some articles they deal with: 18th century dance - 20th century ballet - American folk dance - Ballet comique - Canadian step dance - Country Western Dance International. It's dance moves and competitions, not singers.

WikiProject Gymnastics: Some have formed this collaboration resource and group dedicated to improving Misplaced Pages's coverage of gymnastics, including the organization of information and articles on this topic area. Articles: European Championships, National championships by country, Other notable competitions, Gymnastics routines.

WikiProject Electronic music: This project seeks to categorize, organize and expand articles dealing with electronic music.

WikiProject Rock music: The Rock music WikiProject is a project, created on June 17, 2006, that helps to assemble editors interested in rock subgenres.

WikiProject Television: This is to guide the structure and normalize the standard of articles dealing with the Television medium and television series or other forms of episodic programs.

As you can see, Rouvas fits into none of these projects and they were removed for good reason. If you would like to have them included, please explain why I am "way off". Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 19:29, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

He is definitely not covered by WikiProject TV, so I have removed his listing. Jrh7925 (talk) 21:15, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Conflicts

Firstly, there was never any consensus whether the years go back to the front or not. Anyway it's better that they are behind so they can follow the same style as the albums, which is the format suggested by WP:Albums, we can't just use two diff year formats bcuz some user likes the look of it better, what's the point. Secondly, we've had this discussion many times and never reached a conclusion about changing the instruments and occupations. Like for instruments guitar is obvious, used in many shows, acknowledged (theofanous acknowledged it on x factor even lol) and all of the others are sourced. They have been acknowledged by other sources and musicians. For the lead the term musician sums up everything (since he has also written etc), not to mention it sounds more professional for a summary than singer. And as for the professions, they are all notable of him. Like someone who owns 4 businesses (EDO, S, Mariella, and future tv/film company) can definitely be considered a businessman, not to mention it is something unique for musicians of the Greek standard. He is often also credited as a dancer and up until the late 90s when he met Evangelinos he choreographed all of his own shows (that's sourced), and even today, like at the S Club he was credited for being very involved in the choreography, lighting etc (I can also get that source). I don't see how they are not notable of him. GreekStar12 (talk) 13:47, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

forbes

The reason why Forbes/Time etc puts them in categories is to give them titles, as can also be seen on the American listings. Lazopoulos is only a part time musician and that is not the primary source of influence that he provides, same as Rouvas with acting and hosting. He is the highest ranked of anyone in that category and only one in top 10, so they do have the power to name him as such. Also, forbes is a franchise, so there is no need to mention greek edition in the lead since its already in the body and mentioning celebrity denotes showbiz so there's nothing wrong with saying "in greece" as it is already clarified u r not including scholars and politicians.GreekStar12 (talk) 00:28, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't matter if he is a "part time musician". A musician is still a musician, whether it be part time or not. He has released albums as a singer, he has written songs, and he has been featured on tracks. A musician is someone who writes, performs, or makes music. He certainly is a musician. Obviously Rouvas' main profession is musician, but saying he is the top musician in this case is misleading. Second, as I understood from the source you initially provided, Forbes only listed the top 10 most influential figures in Greek show business. If they categorized him in a musicians list as well, then the story is different. I don't know that though, since your initial source only spoke about influential figures in showbiz list. I can not find any other sources on Forbes as of right now to check for sure. But if they only provide that one list, my point is that although he is a musician and on the list, they didn't specifically give him the title as "most influential Greek musician". They gave him the title of "third most influential figure in Greek show business" or similar. Of course you could reword it to convey that he was one of the top musicians listed, but the way it is worded now makes it seem like a specific title on a separate list. Greekboy (talk) 01:13, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

I have found another source on the Forbes list, and have added it to the article accordingly. I have also added more details from the ranking. Greekboy (talk) 02:17, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Tag

I move to take off the fan pov tag. The person that added that was just a random user, whose never been here before or ever come back, and he didn't even start a discussion or address specific concerns. Nothing of the sort was even picked up on peer review. The article is well layed out, its only problem is missing some sources on the earlier career sections, all of which is not anything contentious. Anything that could be perceived as controversial/fan pov in the artistic and legacy sections is well sourced and heavily at that.GreekStar12 (talk) 21:21, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

To be honest, there are still just a few issues here and there. I haven't really read the article in full in a while, but some things that jump out at me include statements like For this he received positive attention from American celebrity blogger Perez Hilton, making him the first Greek-born celebrity to achieve this.. You seem to try to use specific wording to elevate Rouvas and get around the fact that Kalomira was also mentioned back in early 2009, since she is technically American born, although a Greek celebrity. Plus if you want to get even more technical, Rouvas in not even the first "Greek-born" celebrity mentioned. For example Tommy Lee is technically Greek born, and has been mentioned many times on his blog, even having his own category. There are also parts that still read fan pov-ish, and are unreferenced completely in some cases, like the MAD VMA part under "Live performance and music videos" section. There also seem to be some minor issues related to WP:Weasel, WP:ALLEGED, and WP:EDITORIAL with phrases/words like "some alleged, many agree, notably" etc. that need to be sorted out. Right now, personally, the whole article seems more of a positive-POV on Rouvas. All though all of it is sourced, I feel that the article would benefit if a more balanced view on Rouvas was presented. Also for the record, the user in the peer review back in 2009 did warn against using language that could violate WP:NPOV, amongst his other concerns. Greekboy (talk) 21:50, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Well like I said the peer reviewer said that in general but never addressed anything that specific. Same with the random user who did not provide any reason for the tag, so the concerns could not be addressed. The article definitely needs more sources, especially for the littler/less controversial statements that do not get noticed. I haven't read most of it through in a while either, but I would assume that the biggest problem of the article is the earlier career sections that have remained like that mostly since the article was first expanded. It shouldn't be too hard to remove some random sentences there and try to phrase them better. As for the Kalomira thing that sentence is representative as she is American-born, but I see about Lee so it'll be fixed accordingly. The MAD part is just a summary of awards which are sourced within the body, so those can be moved down too. I see where the part about clean-up comes in but as far as the POV everything is sourced and there is a good amount of negative information, although I am intending to add more. But of course certain sections are to have a more positive POV like the legacy section. That's inevitable, unless you are Hitler lol. So if you have specific negative aspects you would like to add you either have to add it yourself or address specific concerns to me so I can work on finding sources, so write them below if you have any.GreekStar12 (talk) 19:33, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

So two editors including an FA reviewer found the article to be too positive, but their comments should be ignored because they didn't pick through? I believe their comments were directed at the article as a whole. You say that you haven't read through it in a while so I think before you just remove the tag based on what you think the article's condition is, you should read it over and address not only the outright pov issues, but also the potential issues as well. Grk1011 (talk) 20:32, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

The reviewer warned to be careful, a standard on wikipedia and for whoever else you are talking about it is irrelevant if not on the talk page. Again the article is very well sourced (the more controversial statements) and if one cannot back-up a claim that they feel it is too positive, as I have given you guys the chance here, then that is clearly a sign that it is your own pov than fact. With the exception of the supposed marriage, which is difficult to source, all of the controversial events and some negative opinions have been covered (actions in military, supposed suicide attempt, green line concert, yacht etc) and some of the acheivements are not even fully represented. I specifically asked what negative points etc you felt were unrepresented and there was no response. Anyway an occasional poorly worded sentence is not equivalent to an article being not neutral in the ideas it presents. Seeing as how there was never any comment from the original user and nothing is happening here after so long, I am justified in taking it out. GreekStar12 (talk) 22:35, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Citation overkill

13 cites for one word strikes me as a little overkill. -- œ 05:22, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

...and the number of dead links is appalling. Miniapolis 00:43, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Article Split

I've added a split template to the article, as I think it may be time to explore possibly splitting the article. As it stands, the article is almost 160,000 KB. According to WP:SIZESPLIT, an article should start being considered for splitting at as little as 50,000 KB, and almost certainly at over 100,000 KB. I'm not sure what can/should be split, but maybe one of the "Artistry", "Public image" or "Legacy and influence" sections could be a start? Greekboy (talk) 21:50, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Well what specifically did you want to split? The article is long compared to the average article but what remains to be taken out? The obvious ones likes awards, discography etc already exist and in the career section, the individual sections are quite a reasonable length, some are short even. I don't know what you would want to do with the artistry and legacy sections, some of them like the musical section are quite underdeveloped actually. Spin-off articles like one about the 1997 peace concert or influence on popular culture could be done, but I don't see how this would shorten the article by much. Some articles are just long because of the subject, it's not an absolute demand to split. I think it's more important for us to check that individual sections don't get too detailed and long (like focus on an album or ESC, pages which already exist) rather than the overall length.GreekStar12 (talk) 01:26, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

The issue isn't that it's too detailed, it's that according to Misplaced Pages guidelines, pages should not be so long because it greatly impacts users who may be accessing the page on cell phones or who have slower internet speeds. Grk1011 (talk) 19:00, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, frankly, that's their problem. Splitting is not an absolute demand, just a suggestion and there are articles over 300 kb. It's pretty common to see articles on even recent musicians that are over 100kb. The reason why I suggested checking that the amount of detail in individual sections is not overkill is because 1) it reads really poorly and 2) it would give us a place to start, moving it to a possibly already existing article, which would also strengthen that article. That's an easier initial step than trying to create an article like "public image of Sakis Rouvas" or whatever. GreekStar12 (talk) 18:09, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Many days of careful copy editing reversed with no discussion

This edit reverted many days of careful copy editing by a member of the Guild of Copy Editors at the request of one of this page's editors, along with many other fixes to citations. The revert also restored a considerable amount of unsourced text and puffery to the article. I encourage the editors who are watching this article to discuss this latest edit and determine whether it should be undone. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:03, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

I am going to attempt to merge the positives of the copy edit while removing some of the poorer edits discussed so we can reach a happy medium. I'll try to find time in the coming days. Peace. GreekStar12 (talk) 19:46, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps you should stop forcing your version in in the meantime, GreekStar12? Your protestation that you do not wish to edit-war as you constantly edit-war your changes in is infuriating. You have done nothing today but edit-war. You've reverted edits from multiple editors and inserted some of the most egregious puffery I've ever seen into the article in the process. I'll give you an opportunity to undo the edit warring you have done today, but will be taking you to WP:EW/N fairly quickly if your misbehaviour does not stop.—Kww(talk) 20:23, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Really? Perhaps you should stop making destructive (and uninformed) edits and disparaging, condescending remarks to people who are legitimately interested in improving the article, even if it doesn't fit your narrow definition. I've done nothing but try to cooperate with you, only to get short, sarcastic remarks. I politely asked you to not do full reverts, taking out other info, only to find a horribly unrepresentative and highly POV edit to the lead. Forgive me but there's nothing you've specifically pointed out that needs to be changed, you just generalize. As I showed with the FAs none of the stuff you complained about is necessarily inappropriate for a lead (especially when sourced), that's why I asked for specific wording changes/trimming suggestions. Things aren't going to improve with sweeping generalizations and labelling things "terrible". So please don't act as if I'm the one not making attempts to cooperate, I would actually love to get on the same page with other users and have less responsibility for the article (I have very little time). I only regret any copyediting work that may have been deleted, which I'll try to reincorporate, if I can, but the other version of the article was definitely poor. I respect that you are an admin, but you could work on your manners, especially since I've made legitimate communication attempts. GreekStar12 (talk) 23:28, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

• Old requests for peer review
• Biography articles of living people
• All unassessed articles
• B-Class biography articles
• B-Class biography (actors and filmmakers) articles
• Mid-importance biography (actors and filmmakers) articles
• Actors and filmmakers work group articles
• B-Class biography (musicians) articles
• Mid-importance biography (musicians) articles
• Musicians work group articles
• WikiProject Biography articles
• B-Class electronic music articles
• Low-importance electronic music articles
• WikiProject Electronic music articles
• B-Class Eurovision articles
• Low-importance Eurovision articles
• All WikiProject Eurovision pages
• B-Class fashion articles
• Mid-importance fashion articles
• B-Class Greek articles
• High-importance Greek articles
• WikiProject Greece general articles
• All WikiProject Greece pages
• B-Class R&B and Soul Music articles
• Low-importance R&B and Soul Music articles
• WikiProject R&B and Soul Music articles
• B-Class Rock music articles
• Mid-importance Rock music articles
• WikiProject Rock music articles
• Misplaced Pages pages referenced by the press
• Misplaced Pages pages with to-do lists
• Articles copy edited by the Guild of Copy Editors