# Talk:Aurora (singer)

Is it really necessary to have a whole section dedicated to it? It barely signifies anything in Aurora's career, and I don't think it deserves the emphasis. Half the sources are Twitter or Instagram, and even some if some users see it as relevant information, it's been overly sensationalized and it affects the public image of a real person (the drummer). Even the section itself implies it was all a matter of social media buzz. I think it should be removed. JBOOK17 (talk) 01:53, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Agreed ProudWatermelon (talk) 03:00, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
The controversy was moved to the "Public image and philanthropy" section by a user I wasn't. Although I also think this does not add anything to the article, the controversy was picked up by the largest media outlets in Brazil and Norway (such as Veja, G1 and VG). To avoid sensationalism, I chose to include the controversy's outcome and make the text more neutral. Bloodinthewine (talk) 10:07, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

Currently first sentence of the lede says:
> Aurora Aksnes ..., known simply as Aurora (stylized in all capital letters), ...
Would it be better to stylise her stage name in capital letters, like it says?So it would read:
> Aurora Aksnes ..., known simply as AURORA (stylized in all capital letters), ...
Or is there a reason this shouln't be done? Kardoen (talk) 11:27, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Aurora (singer)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Bloodinthewine (talk · contribs) 21:18, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: EllaMinnowPea371 (talk · contribs) 02:00, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
Hi! I will be reviewing this article. Since (I believe) this is your first nomination, I recommend familiarizing yourself with the criteria if you haven't already. Comments to come in the following days. 
P.S. I love your username. Blood in the Wine is a great song <3
ellaminnowpea (371 💬) 02:00, 15 August 2025 (UTC)


### Initial review – see the criteria
Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct: 

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation: 

Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
Note: spot check below
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): 

C. It contains no original research: 

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism: 
Earwig check is clean, did not see anything in the spot check
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic: 
No notable subtopics are omitted.
B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style): 

Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each: 
Note the Controversy section as exemplary of demonstrating multiple viewpoints fairly.
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute: 

Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content: 
All images are licensed correctly.
B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: 
Images are relevant, support the text, and have explanatory captions.
Overall:
Pass or Fail: 


### Spot check (criteria 2)
[6] * Cannot verify
[13] Y But I would suggest rephrasing to "home" or similar since the source doesn't specifically mention Drange.
[24] * Domain is not used anymore (plus I see no mention of the publisher anywhere, and who is Liza Darwin?), so I cannot determine if this is a reliable source or not.
[31] Y
[49] N WP:OR; citation is a link to a BBC radio publication rather than a news outlet describing the song's success, which would actually support the prior statement.
[55] Y
[68] Y
[76] Y
[83] N Where did "May 2016" come from? The article was published in November.
[96] N Source supports that she performed at Glastonbury but not the rest of the phrase.
[107] Y
[117] Y
[127] Y
[134] Y
[140] Y
[149] Y But I would also cite the additional sources listed in What Happened to the Earth?
[166] Y
[181] Y * But I wouldn't say that how Rosenzweig compares Aurora to Lorde is a "melodic similarity"
[194] Y
Summary: Most citations are fine, some are unverifiable or inaccurate or contain original research; I recommend reviewing all citations to see that all information is sourced correctly. Particularly, the issues I flagged need to be resolved immediately.
@Bloodinthewine: I see that an IP has fixed the most of the citation issues I pointed out (I assume it was you, but I can't be sure); note that [6] and [24] still have problems. In the future I would appreciate it if you could reply to this review so I know when issues can be addressed. Because the major sourcing issues have been solved, I can proceed with the rest of the review.


### Prose (criterion 1a)
#### Early life
"Aurora spent her early years in Høle, a small town where her parents had lived for 15 years" Do you intend to say that her parents lived there for 15 years before she was born, or that they all lived there for the first 15 years of her life? Please clarify.
"Aurora described her childhood home as a quiet..." Drange or Høle?
I suggest that there be a comma after "activities like climbing trees" in the second paragraph.
I suggest removing the phrase "Aurora found her classmates overly attentive" because it doesn't add much and I can't see why her classmates' attentiveness would prompt her to retreat from them.
"...which was later released in 2015" no need for the word "later"


#### Career beginnings
"...at the Norwegian Youth Festival of Art with songs like..." should be "to" instead of "with"


#### All My Demons Greeting Me as a Friend
"The album's vivid lyrical themes about fantasy, heartache, life, and death," no need for a comma after "death"


#### What Happened to the Heart?
The group of sentences beginning with "In October 2023..." and ending with "...a headlining tour in Norway." should start the paragraph instead of being in the middle of it.


#### Public image and philanthropy
"She has also been politically vocal, particularly during the 2023–2024 Gaza War," The Gaza War is ongoing. Please correct this.


### Detail (criterion 3b)
#Early life needs to be trimmed down, especially with regards to the detail given to the nature of her childhood, like in the sentence "Her proximity to the sea and her parents' ownership of a sailboat also sparked her interest in the ocean." Particularly the second paragraph of this section could have a lot of things removed.
@Bloodinthewine: It's been over a week since I've made a comment and I have still seen no response from you whatsoever. I'm going to give you two more days to address the issues I brought up or at least reply to my comments before I fail the review. ellaminnowpea (371 💬) 00:46, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

@EllaMinnowPea371: Hey, Ella! Thanks a ton, I'm also super into Blood In The Wine :3
So, here's the deal: I made some changes, but the article still needs a bit of work. There's some original research in a few paragraphs, though they’ve got solid sources online.
As for the citations:
[6] (now [16]) is a pretty long interview, but I'm not sure how I can get you access to it.
[24] (now [23]) is working fine through the archived URL; you just need to wait a bit for the article to load.
Bloodinthewine (talk) 23:36, 5 September 2025 (UTC)
Hi, sorry for the late response. Can you please be more clear when you say "There's some original research in a few paragraphs, though they’ve got solid sources online"--- where exactly? If the statements can be sourced, why don't you source them? The article is well-written and I'd like to pass it, but I can't if you admit that there's original research that I didn't catch in the spot check. ellaminnowpea (371 💬) 05:05, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
just sourced it up :) Bloodinthewine (talk) 17:54, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Aurora of Bergen.jpg
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:23, 10 October 2025 (UTC)