File talk:But Im a Cheerleader.ogg
Spoken article quality assessment[edit]
Version reviewed: as at 20 May 2008
Technical quality: High
- Excellent quality of recording.
- Some very noticeable changes in audio level at section introductions, but overall very stable.
- One mic "knock", but not serious.
Clarity: High
- Well-read and easy to understand. No hesitation or floundering.
- Good pacing.
- Not enough pause before sections, giving a "run-on" feeling to the article as a whole.
Accuracy: High
As this recording was added by a very active contributor of spoken articles, I have chosen to point out some "picky" minor issues, even though I still think that the overall accuracy of this recording is high.
- As external links are mentioned at the end of the recording, I would not refer to the two that are at the bottom of the main infobox. I think the inclusion of external links in a recording should be minimal at best, and the declaring of the same two links twice is superfluous. I am flagging this as an opinion!
- I felt there was an "inflection error" (if there is such a thing!) in Section 1: Plot, Paragraph 2, first sentence. Where "cure" is in quotes, this is not made obvious by the inflection of the reader's voice. This could lead to misunderstandings by listeners, who interpret this as acceptance that homosexuality is something to be "cured of".
- I felt that "quote" and "end quote" were overused throughout. They were added even to very short quotes, some as short as three words, where just slight inflection would have made the quotation obvious. An example where "quote" and "end quote" were used unnecessarily: 'Mike wears a t-shirt that proclaims "Straight is great!" and tries to teach the boys at True Directions to become more masculine.' In cases like this in particular, it can be very distracting to a listener who is keen enough to pick up on a shirt's slogan without needing "quote" and "end quote".
- I thought that lists and infoboxes were treated very well, especially as they can be tricky. However, in Section 5: Rating and Distribution, the information in the infobox is already given clearly in the text. I think this is definitely a situation where the audio should omit the infobox, as it doesn't provide any additional information or clarity. It felt like "clutter" to me, especially as I had just been given the same information only a few sentences before, which made it even more tiresome to listen to.
- Sometimes I think that it is worth deviating from a format, where the departure enhances the giving of information in a clearer and more natural way. In the listing of music tracks, the reader separates the writers of the music / song from the performers – quite rightly. However, where the writer and performer is the same, I would break format and say instead, "Written and performed by RuPaul." For an only instance I wouldn't have mentioned it, but there ended up being four tracks where the writer and performer are the same. I think it may help to really think about the listener and how natural or unnatural a format may be when used to the extreme – such as with the infobox in Section 5. What I think should be avoided is the listener beginning to feel, "Oh, come ON already!" which is what I started to feel after the fourth, "Written by Go Sailor, Performed by Go Sailor."
- In line with some of the things I have just mentioned, I felt that overall the reader was trying to record a "snapshot" of the written text, instead of interpreting it for the listener in the most useful, informative, and efficient way.
- Where the characters and actors were written as "Megan (Lyonne)" I like how the reader said, "Megan, played by Lyonne," instead of just inflecting the name in parentheses. It's much easier to understand and flows well. One small problem was the consistency. Towards the latter half of the article, just the name was read and "played by" was omitted.
- I do not mean to be critical of American pronunciations, as I mess up enough pronunciations myself! But the name Ian is never eye-an. It is ee-an. Always! (The name Ian is mentioned in Track 7 of the track listing.)
This is only my second review of a spoken article, and my first time listening to a recording by this user. I hope that I was objective (mostly!) and fair, and that anything I've mentioned has been constructive. Please let me know if there are any issues with my review, as I am happy to re-evaluate if it's needed. Thank you very much for a great recording!
Notes: {{{notes}}}
Help with recording issues can be obtained under "Recording assistance" here.
Information on the assessment procedure can be found on the spoken article assessment page.