Talk:Tamara Rojo

message: This is a very interesting article in a sense it is about a topic/person that I don't know about. It is also very well-written, and it seems like a very professional submission. There are only a few additional things that I feel should be included/edited in this webpage. Concerning your quotes, I feel that there is a major lack in sources/references in this. For example, in the first section you quote her speaking of talking in English, but you haven't placed any link as to where that quote had come from ( i.e. [1] ). Another suggestion that I have is concerning the organization with your "Performances" and "Awards" sections. In the performance section, if you could, I would add the dates/years of each specific performance. For your awards section, it may be more user friendly if you added: "what she won the award for", "who gave her the award", etc. (For example, See Blink-182's awards). All in all this is a very well put together article, but I feel once you add/change these factors it will be near perfect. JKinzbach (talk) 15:38, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Final Peer Review

message: The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- KenWalker | Talk 07:06, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Assessment#Class_parameter|Biography assessment rating]] comment 

message: I have removed some information about Tamara Rojo in this page which seem to be incorrect:
1. She is definitely not the first Spaniard to be a member of the Royal Ballet. For example, both Laura Morera (joined 1995) and Zenaida Yanowsky (joined 1994), joined RB earlier and are Spanish.
2. Changed prima ballerina in relation to ENB and RB to Principal Dancer -- this is the official rank of both companies.
3. Not sure what "youngest artist in the history of ballet to become prima ballerina" means, and the link to the cha2005 webpage is blank -- removed both.
4. Joining RB "at the invitation of Sir Anthony Dowel" may be inaccurate -- judging from articles about her, e.g. the 
http://www.ballet.co.uk/magazines/yr_02/apr02/interview_rojo.htm
article referenced by the page, she initiated contact with RB about joining them.
--Kish Shen  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.103.102.178 (talk) 14:02, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  comment about my edits 19 Dec 2007 

message: Well-written: its prose is engaging, even brilliant, and of a professional standard;
The prose in this article is very professional and informational (as it should be) but at the same time I was very engaged and intrigued while reading it. You did a very nice job in captivating me in the synthesization of Tamara's life. And I didn't even notice any grammatical errors. Very well done. 
Comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context [and what might be missing?]
This article seems very comprehensive and certainly doesn't neglect any major facts or details about Tamara's life. It also doesn't seem to go too deeply into little details that aren't vital to Tamara's story so, well done there. However, I feel that it would be beneficial for the reader to know at least a little information about each of the awards in your list of awards. Maybe having a little snippet of a sentence for each award saying who/what organization gave her the award, the significance of the award, or why/how she was chosen for the award etc. So maybe just like one or two sentences giving a little background on each award I think would be beneficial to the reader. 
Well-researched: it is characterized by a thorough and representative survey of relevant literature on the topic. Claims are verifiable against high-quality reliable sources and are supported with citations; this requires a "References" section in which sources are listed, complemented by inline citations where appropriate; [are there a variety of sources/viewpoints?]
I would say the main (and basically the only) weakness of this page is that there seems to be only one source. And you only used the one reference in-line twice. And on top of that, the one sited reference links out to a dead informationless page. So you may want to consider finding (if you haven't already) additional sources and citing them more frequently throughout the page. And also fix what ever is wrong with the link to the source you already have. Otherwise, I would imagine the wikipedia admins might take down the page due to lack of sources. On the plus side, you have tons and tons of external links which is great. Maybe you could use some of them as your cited sources. 
Neutral: it presents views fairly and without bias
There isn't much to say here except that you did a great job in keeping the text informative and historically matter-of-fact rather than persuasive and biased. 
Formatted appropriately: it follows Wikipedia style guidelines.
The over format/outline looks very professional and pretty well thought out. So far it looks like the wikipedia admins like the way you laid out her list of ballets performed which is impressive. It's usually pretty hard to please them when it comes to extensive lists like that. One of the only things I can think of pertaining to the outline is you could (if you want to) put Major Injuries as a sub-category to Career. If you want to do that just put 3 "=" symbols instead of 2 on both sides of the heading of Major Injuries. But other than that, the format seems to comply with wikipedia style guidelines and seems to be in a very logical, fluid arrangement. All in all, I know that this page will turn out to be an exceptionally professional page and am truly impressed with it already. I'm excited to see the finished product! Great job! Drsulliv (talk) 19:38, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review 

message: Well Written: As a previous reviewer mentioned, this article is much like a biography. I think that this is working well. Wikipedia seems to be impressed with your article as it fits into areas they are looking to expand. I found this article to be very well written and informative. I like that you used a table and a list for her roles and awards. This would be too overwhelming in prose. The only thing you might consider changing is splitting sections into smaller paragraphs, though this is not necessary. Very professional, good job!
Comprehensive: Very comprehensive, with information about her childhood, education, roles, and awards. I feel like I got a good sense of her life. You do an excellent job of writing this as a professional article.
Well Researched: While you seem to have done extensive research, you are lacking citations in the references section. I think it is very important for you to expand your references as soon as possible. There's information out there on her and you should provide this information to researchers. Maybe you can incorporate some of your links as references. Also, note the broken link on the one reference you provide.
Formatted Appropriately: Well done! The formatting looks great. I especially like the table and list.
Neutral: There is no bias in this article unless there is negative information you have left out.
Carolyn Fagan 06:06, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review by Cwfagan