Talk:Carroll Baker/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: onel5969 (talk · contribs) 21:49, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
In process, will finish it today or tomorrow.
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
- Concise, well-written, proper grammar, no spelling errors. Two Issues: 1) last sentence in second paragraph in the Early life section is awkwardly written, due to the sequence of places (I'd probably put Windsor, Ontario last to fix the problem): 2) the article is about an American actress, so the grammar should follow American English - there are several instances where British English is used (e.g. theatre, programme).
- B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
- The lead is very well written, and representative of the article as a whole. The article's entire structure is very well laid-out, with logical breaks and smooth transitions. Issue - the lead and the body of the article appear to be at odds in one aspect: her discovery. How can Kazan have "discovered" her on Broadway, when she had already been in several films, including a major role in Giant?
- A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- No issues.
- B. Cites reliable sources, where necessary:
- I didn't check every citation link, but those I audited contained no dead links, although the YouTubeinterview appears to no longer work (but that could be my laptop, sometimes it has issues with YouTube - but you should check it). However, regarding citations, this is where the most work is needed. There appear to be several facts which should (imho) be cited:
- Early career - 1) Dumont network credit; 2) the Tennessee Williams fact (might be in the YouTube video I can't bring up); 3) the line about her notoriety before Baby Doll's opening also should have a cite.
- Contract battles - 1) Bridge to the Sun reaction should be cited; 2) 'Come on Strong theater credit should be cited; not sure if the Life Cover should have a citation, but it would be nice.
- Sex symbol - Cheyenne Autumn as last Western should be cited, else it appears to be OR.
- European career - the reason for the move to Europe does not appear to be supported by the citation at the end of the following sentence; her intro to Marco Ferreri needs a citation.
- Return to American film - 1) citation for return to theater (in fact, the citation following the next sentence seems to contradict that BB&C was in the UK); 2) John Hough's admiration needs a citation.
- Box-office successes - no citations needed, but the last sentence of the first paragraph doesn't make sense. Use of the word "sporadically", followed by the scope of her work doesn't mesh.
- Retirement - this section is almost wholly uncited. Both of the first paragraphs should have some references to back up the facts contained therein.
- Personal life - 1) Actors Studio; 2) family info at the end of the first paragraph.
- I didn't check every citation link, but those I audited contained no dead links, although the YouTubeinterview appears to no longer work (but that could be my laptop, sometimes it has issues with YouTube - but you should check it). However, regarding citations, this is where the most work is needed. There appear to be several facts which should (imho) be cited:
- C. No original research:
- as long as the citations above are corrected, this appears okay.
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- Covers all aspects of her life and career.
- B. Focused (see summary style):
- Gives appropriate coverage to each aspect of her life.
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- While an active edit history, not a contentious one.
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- All the images appear to be properly tagged with either PD or appropriate CC licenses. The one exception is the Baby Doll image, which is a fair use tag, and I'm not sure that fair use extends to this article. It's a grey area, and I definitely don't think it would pass an FA review. See WP:NFC#UUI, #6.
- B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- Very nice use of images
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- It's almost there. My comments above are relatively easy fixes, for the most part (except for the citation stuff). No movement in almost a month. Gone stale.
- Pass or Fail:
