Talk:Disgraced/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Quadell (talk · contribs) 23:49, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Nominator: TonyTheTiger
Hello again. This looks like a fascinating play, and the article is a strong GA nominee. Most of the GA criteria pass right away, but I have found a few issues.
Resolved issues
|
---|
|
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No edit wars, etc.:
- It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- All issues have been resolved, and I'm happy to promote this article. – Quadell (talk) 20:14, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail:
Outside opinions
[edit]I always welcome outside opinions, though I will pass or fail this article based on my own assessment of whether the article fulfills our GA criteria. – Quadell (talk) 14:46, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- FYI, Ssilvers always has a lot of commentary on the plays and musicals. I suspect he may have more comments than you. He always is of the opinion that there is a lot more work to meet his standards. Expect a 2nd opinion regardless of what you think about this. He is also likely to help me respond to your concerns.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 01:19, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- I have been summoned! I don't care about this article, but it is not GA quality yet. Just looking at it for 2 seconds, I see that it does not have an adequte WP:LEAD section or plot summary, and little discussion of the original production: how was it designed and staged? How did the staging illuminate the themes? -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:53, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- Don't care about Pulitzer Prize-winner? Given some of the small-time things that I have done that you have spent time with, I am a bit surprised. Well, I didn't want to sneak one past you since you always seem to want to comment. Feel free to go back to whatever you were doing.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:28, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- I have been summoned! I don't care about this article, but it is not GA quality yet. Just looking at it for 2 seconds, I see that it does not have an adequte WP:LEAD section or plot summary, and little discussion of the original production: how was it designed and staged? How did the staging illuminate the themes? -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:53, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- I've read the article. It is not well written and fails to engage the reader. Also noticeable lack of images from either production or the cast.Turnitinpro (talk) 02:14, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- Lack of images is irrelevant to a WP:GAN. Not sure where engaging the reader falls in relation to WP:WIAGA.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:26, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- Images are the 6th criteria for WP:GACR. Failed to engage me because prose lacked something in its clarity and brevity.Turnitinpro (talk) 03:45, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- Images have never been required for a WP:GAC. If you have them they have to follow WP:GACR, but they are not required.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:17, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- Prose suggestions welcome.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:17, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- Turnitinpro, Your edits [1] have now screwed up the template at the top twice. What are you doing?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:17, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- There's an HTML error in the template. WTF is "
"? It was deprecated in 2004, W3C fought over it and then it got back as "
" in 2009. I use a proprietary (non-free) browser purchased in 2007 which can't abide sloppy coding.Turnitinpro (talk) 12:58, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- There's an HTML error in the template. WTF is "
- Images are the 6th criteria for WP:GACR. Failed to engage me because prose lacked something in its clarity and brevity.Turnitinpro (talk) 03:45, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- Lack of images is irrelevant to a WP:GAN. Not sure where engaging the reader falls in relation to WP:WIAGA.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:26, 6 December 2013 (UTC)