Talk:Ashley Graham (Resident Evil)

Image

Why did you delete the image? Empty2005 06:31, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

The image probably didn't have a rationale and source link. --Snkcube 03:15, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Fair enough Empty2005 03:56, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Requested move 23 March 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

• Ashley Graham (Resident Evil) → Ashley (Resident Evil)
• Ashley Graham (model) → Ashley Graham
• Ashley Graham → Ashley Graham (disambiguation)

– There's a pretty solid argument that the model is what most people are looking for when they search for "Ashley Graham", based on pageviews. There's also no point doing a WP:NATURAL disambiguation of Ashley from Resident Evil when there's already someone named Ashley Graham. So, I suggest simply moving the RE character to "Ashley" per WP:COMMONNAME and making the model primary for "Ashley Graham". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:13, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Oppose RE move; ambivalent on other two moves: Although I'm not oppossed to "Ashley Graham" the model becoming the primary topic, the idea that RE's Ashley should be moved to just "Ashley (Resident Evil)" doesn't make sense to me. Like, the character's last name is quite well-known. It's not as if only appears in the credits or the girl is surnameless. Ashley's page title should remain exactly the same. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 12:00, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Oppose RE move Resident Evil characters are known and often referred to by their full names and Ashley is no exception. Changing the disambiguation and model page titles I am OK with but the RE move I oppose. TarkusAB^talk/contrib 17:49, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose I see no reason to move the BioHazard videogame topic, we would just end up moving fictional characters around like crazy if we follow that precedent. You can create your suggested pagename as a redirect -- 65.92.244.249 (talk) 06:54, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
• Support making model Ashley the primary topic and Oppose changing RE Ashley's title per all other RE character's wikipedia articles and above. Putting a see also template with the new disambiguation page at the top of the article should be sufficient. Yeoutie (talk) 03:00, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ashley Graham (Resident Evil)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Kung Fu Man (talk · contribs) 00:36, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):

   b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a. (reference section):

   b. (citations to reliable sources):

   c. (OR):

   d. (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a. (major aspects):

   b. (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):

   b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/fail:

(Criteria marked are unassessed)

Other than needing a light copyedit, all previous concerns I had were addressed, and the article is far more detailed and thorough. To boot it was actually a pleasure to read also. No problem with passing it for Good Article status.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 00:36, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Pre-GAN notes

For posterity, copy of my pre-GAN notes from User_talk:GlatorNator#Ashley_Graham_(Resident_Evil)_pre-GAN_feedback: Hello! I noticed Ashley still hadn't gone through the GAN process, so I wanted to share some thoughts on it before I took a swing on things I feel may be a problem for the article:

• There are many single paragraph subsections, several of these feel like they can be worked into the parent sections for the most part. Citing promotional material or media such as figures or promotional videos may help bolster the other appearances part (I know they did this for RE8 for example with the puppet shorts).
• Can the overall appearances section be fleshed out any more? It feels short and stubby. What about any points you play as the character, or characterization? You can cite in-game dialogue or scenes for this information if need be. And if she is playable for any length of time how does she compare to Leon? What about any particular gameplay elements or costumes specific to her that can be unlocked during the course of the game?
• The second image showcasing Ashley is a fair use image, meaning it needs better rationale in the body of the article. A lot of the reception seems to focus on her original portrayal being negative, is there an image that can be used instead to convey this while also showing the original Ashley?

I hope that helps. I would like to review it definitely, there's a lot of good work here. I just have those concerns and I'd rather not drop them on you during the GAN itself given how things are lately.-- Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:07, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the review! Really appreciate all your recent works on the character articles. GlatorNator (ᴛ) 00:39, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

I reverted the change to the OG 2005 image. The new screenshot was quite bad, you couldn't see anything at all. I understand Kung Fu Man's concern but that screenshot wasn't an improvement. Actually, the current concept image actually isn't that bad. It shows her with legs crossed and a skirt. You can see her thighs. I think it's suitable for the context. TarkusAB^talk/contrib 00:41, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

I think you were right. Thanks for weighing in. Regards. GlatorNator (ᴛ) 11:56, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: withdrawn by nominator, closed by Theleekycauldron (talk) 22:24, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Resident Evil character Ashley Graham was originally created as an unnamed character simply referred to as "Girl"? Source: https://www.vg247.com/writer-ashamed-of-resident-evil-4-hook-man-experiement
  • ALT1: ... that Resident Evil character Ashley Graham's appearance in Resident Evil 4 had many media outlets calling her one of the worst video game characters? Source: https://www.escapistmagazine.com/8-of-the-most-hateable-video-game-characters/ , https://gamingbolt.com/11-worst-characters-in-the-entire-resident-evil-series/9?amp=1
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/9 January 1917 German Crown Council meeting
  • Comment: Unsure if the nomination has been malformed since the preview does not look good.

Improved to Good Article status by GlatorNator (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 19:05, 7 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Ashley Graham (Resident Evil); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing:
• Neutral:
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

• Cited:
• Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: ALT0 is not supported by the source. It mentions a young girl but not that she was unnamed. ALT1 is supported by the sources. I think it's more interesting than ALT0. As a side note: this is my first DYK review so it might be good for a more experienced reviewer to take a look. Phlsph7 (talk) 07:28, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

More experienced reviewer here. You should have investigated whether the nominator requires a QPQ. (On this occasion, I corrected Onegreatjoke's malformed nom, so it said that was me, even though it was not, which I've now corrected.)--Launchballer 13:45, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out. I had assumed that Onegreatjoke had done the nomination and review for your sake but it would probably have been better to inquiry than to assume. Phlsph7 (talk) 14:35, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

@Onegreatjoke: Any progress on the sources? Or should we go with ALT1? Phlsph7 (talk) 07:24, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

unsure on how to fix the sourcing issue. Maybe we could go for alt1 but i'm unsure. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:37, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

ALT1 is fine in terms of sourcing. However, since the article refers often to "Girl", I'm not sure that it fulfills the adequate-sourcing-requirement. But my experience with DYK is still rather limited. If you are also unsure then it may be better to let the application fail. What are your thoughts? Phlsph7 (talk) 17:51, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

I think i'll just withdraw. Onegreatjoke (talk) 21:04, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

I feel like this was abandoned. GlatorNator (ᴛ) 23:07, 3 June 2023 (UTC)