Talk:Fairy Godmother (Shrek)/GA1

GA review

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

Reviewer: Bobamnertiopsis (talk · contribs) 18:46, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look at this one! —Collin^{t c} 18:46, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

1a: There's a lot of changes recommended here but they're mostly related to long sentences with broken agreement between subjects and verbs and making tenses consistent.

The character Shrek can be linked upon first appearance in the lede.

Fixed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Fairy Godmother has received mostly positive reviews from film critics, who appreciated her humor and villainy, as well as Saunders' performance, some of whom compared it to her Absolutely Fabulous character Edina Monsoon." The final clause here should be reordered a bit, maybe "...performance, which some critics compared to her Absolutely..."

Fixed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fiona should only be linked once in the first section under the lede. Right now she's linked twice in two consecutive sentences.

Fixed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can the pejorative term "gypsy" be replaced with "Romani", to which the page already pipes a link?

I should have caught this. Fixed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can the following sentence be broken into two? It's a little tough to understand in current form: "While discussing ideas for a potential sequel following the success of the first film, DreamWorks recalled that they had enjoyed incorporating traditional fairy tale elements such as magical potions into the franchise, in addition to "the concept of a Fairy Godmother-like character who eventually turned out to be a bit of a trickster",[6] revealing her to be responsible for advising Fiona's parents to lock her in a tower and await Prince Charming's rescue when they consult her about their daughter's curse."

Revised.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto this one: "When developing Shrek Forever After (2010), the fourth and final installment in the film series, the filmmakers wanted to make the film's villain, Rumpelstiltskin, as different as possible from previous Shrek villains,[12] including Fairy Godmother, who actor Walt Dohrn described as a "very eloquent" character,[13] envisioning him as a "ratty, childish, scummy man" to contrast with Fairy Godmother, who is a successful businesswoman.[14]"

Revised.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"The actress found working on an animated film to be liberating and have several advantages as an actor" → "The actress found working on an animated film to be liberating and found the experience to have several advantages as an actor"

Fixed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"appreciating that critics and viewers are not able to judge her physical appearance" Change "are" to "were".

Fixed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Saunders sings the "Fairy Godmother Song"" "sings" to "sang"

Fixed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"she did not meet her castmates until the film's premiere at the Cannes Film Festival, including Antonio Banderas and Julie Andrews, who voice Puss in Boots and Queen Lillian, respectively." The "including" feels like an orphaned clause—maybe change to "she did not meet her castmates, including Antonio Banderas and Julie Andrews, who voiced Puss in Boots and Queen Lillian, respectively, until the film's premiere at the Cannes Film Festival" or "it was not until the film's premiere at Cannes Film Festival that she met her castmates, including Antonio Banderas and Julie Andrews, who voiced Puss in Boots and Queen Lillian, respectively."

I like the second one. Fixed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"found it interesting that Saunders received two songs in the film, as opposed to Andrews." → "found it interesting that Saunders, instead of [or as opposed to] Andrews received two songs in the film."

Fixed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"the character TD setup" Can a bracketed clarification of what "TD" means be added to this quote? I'm guessing Technical drawing but I don't know for sure.

You are correct, it is technical drawing; fixed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Christopher Fiduccia of Screen Rant believes that Saunders closely resembles her character" → "Christopher Fiduccia of Screen Rant believed that Saunders closely resembled her character"

Fixed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"from where Shrek steals a potion hoping that becoming handsome would earn Shrek's father in-law's approval." → "from which Shrek steals a potion in hope of becoming handsome to win his father in-law's approval."

Fixed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

King Harold need only be linked upon the first appearance.

Fixed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Harold who ultimately turns into a frog in the process.[49] Fiona ultimately chooses" Two "ultimately"s in a row, maybe delete the second?

Fixed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"in favour of returning to their ogre" → "in favour of the pair returning to their ogre"

Fixed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Hugh Hart of the San Francisco Chronicle believes" should be "believed"

Fixed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Dan DeMaggio of Metro Times wrote that the character is" should be "was"

Fixed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Variety film critic Todd McCarthy wrote that Saunders does" should be "did"

Fixed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"However, the critic enjoyed" → "However, "LaSalle enjoyed"

Fixed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"The Seattle Post-Intelligencer's Paula Nechak felt that Fairy Godmother grows" should be "grew"

Fixed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"one of five awards the film won at the ceremony." Replace "the film" with "Shrek 2"

Fixed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Allison J. Scharmann, contributing to the Harvard Crimson, believes" should be "believed"

Fixed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Bailey Rymes of Her Campus called" italicize Her Campus for consistency

Fixed.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1b: No problems; the lead is a solid summary of the body and the fiction elements in the Appearance section are in an appropriate tense.

2a: Looks good.

2b: Are Odyssey, Qnetwork.com, Skwigly, and Jim Hill Media reliable sources?

Yes. I wouldn't use them to prove highly contested or important facts, but for the purpose of the article I would say they are sufficent.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2c: Very well-sourced and article does not make original claims.

Thanks!--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2d: Earwig's flagged text all appears to be things quoted in the article; no close paraphrasing issues identified from a spotcheck of sources.

Thanks.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

3a: Looks good.

3b: Looks good.

4: No problems with neutrality.

5:' Article looks stable.

6a: Can the "n.a."s in the rationale template at File:Fairy Godmother Shrek 2.png be filled in? There appear to be several clearer photos of Saunders on Commons if you'd prefer to use any of those but I won't hold that against the GA.

I've filled in the "n.a."s.--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:59, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

6b: Both images are quite relevant!

Overall: the article's in pretty good shape and mostly just needs some changes in wording to clean up the prose. Changedforbetter, putting this on hold for ten days or until you feel like it's done, whichever's sooner. —Collin^{t c} 21:03, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your quick review! I think I've addressed all points; awaiting the final verdict.Collin--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:59, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Changedforbetter, I'm satisfied that the article now meets the Good Article criteria. Congrats! —Collin^{t c} 15:58, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]