Talk:Daredevil season 2/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Jujutsuan (talk · contribs) 19:19, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good at first glance. Will begin a more detailed review now. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} | talk | contribs) 19:19, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've evaluated everything but the reliability of the sources. This article looks to be in very good shape so far, after I did some minor copy-editing. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} | talk | contribs) 20:34, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing this for us @Jujutsuan: I've just gone through and done a c/e myself, cutting down all those quotes so that we don't have so many blockquotes. We probably should have done that before nominating anyway. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:56, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No problem @Adamstom.97: This raises a stylistic question though. I had actually put the blockquote formatting on most of those. WP:BLOCKQUOTE says anything over 40 words merits being offset as a block quotation. I didn't run word counts, but I eyeballed it and most of them, I think (I'd have to double-check) met the criterion. IMO it made the article much more readable; you could see what the quote was about, then get to the quote and know immediately when it ends, instead of having to hunt for the ending quotation mark on the long quotes where it can be easy to miss. Would you be opposed to me reinstating the blockquotes? Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} | talk | contribs) 22:49, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wait, I misinterpreted your edit. You meant you shortened the quotes, not just reformatted. Hmm... I actually enjoyed reading through them. I know WP isn't a wp:QUOTEFARM, but I think there might be some value in leaving them in the longer form. What do you think? Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} | talk | contribs) 22:51, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stylistically, editors of the MCU-related articles try to avoid an over abundance of block quotes in the prose. And the reason for that is we should be paraphrasing to avoid WP:COPYVIO. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:21, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I guess if anyone really wants the firsthand account they can go to the sources. This is a moot point, then. Only problem left to solve is the ref reliability. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} | talk | contribs) 23:25, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

This article's references don't all support the content. Just at first glance, Daredevil_(season_2)#Cast_and_characters is a problem. At least the first few cast members' refs aren't supported by cited source. They name the actors but not the roles, etc. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} | talk | contribs) 23:02, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed the ref sourcing you mentioned. If you had any other specific complaints regarding the refs, the rest should be fine. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:21, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I agree; the rest of the refs look way too specific to be unreliable, and they're from decent sources. I'll go ahead and pass this nom now. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} | talk | contribs) 23:52, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations Favre1fan93! Your nominated article, Daredevil (season 2) has been promoted to Good Article status. It met all the criteria after a little fixing up. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} | talk | contribs) 00:24, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Appreciate the review! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 03:07, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]