Talk:Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Red Phoenix (talk · contribs) 16:00, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
I found the material in this article quite interesting, as someone who remembers hearing about the Columbine massacre and watching it on the news when I was young. Unfortunately, there are a high number of issues with this article. While it would qualify for a quick-fail on the basis of the unresolved banners, I'll try to be at least a bit more thorough and give some grounds for improvement.
- While a lot of the citation needed banners were placed in April of this year and the article was nominated in December 2019, there is at least one clarification needed tag from June 2019.
- Additionally, there are a lot of paragraphs that don't end in a citation. That's a bright red flag, since everything should be cited to a reliable source.
- The "In popular culture" section is very repetitive and needs to be condensed into paragraphs rather than a list of WP:TRIVIA. There is also a lot of uncited material in this section.
- A lot of the "Legacy" section duplicates with the Columbine effect article. That's fine to an extent, but the focus needs to be narrowed in each article. For Harris and Klebold's article, I would focus only on those that focus only on inspiration from Harris and Klebold and their actions and motivations, not Columbine as a whole and the idea of a school shooting just from that. "May have beens" wouldn't apply to the two perpetrators specifically, but the Dawson college shooting with the note praising the two would be more relevant.
- Based on the amount of uncited, I would also recommend someone go through the sections with little sourcing or one source to weed out what is uncited and what isn't. I can't with confidence say it is all sourced appropriately, but I won't do spot-checks for each source at this time.
- On a positive note, the copyvio detector doesn't appear to suggest any copyright violation at this time. The only "possibilities" are to direct quotes of individuals, so that is not a violation as long as attribution is made.
- Although they are on Wikipedia Commons, I would want a second opinion regarding the images of the guns, given they have copyright notices.
Because of the major issues with the sourcing, I will respectfully decline a detailed prose pass-through at this point, because fixing the source issues is likely to result in a massive overhaul to the prose. Unfortunately this means I have to fail the article, as this is likely to be a long project someone will have to undertake to get this right. It goes beyond a few tags and late additions - this appears to need work to comply with policies such as WP:V. Red Phoenix talk 16:20, 6 May 2020 (UTC)