Talk:Fire and Sword/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: ArcticSeeress (talk · contribs) 14:56, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Hey there, DanCherek. I'm ArcticSeeress, and I'll be your reviewer for this article. Before I start, I'd like to say that I do not have access to the sources used in the article, so if there are any potential clarifications needed, I may ask for quotes and such. Anyway, on with the review.

The prose is clear and concise, the content is well organised, and it follows MOS. All information is cited to reliable sources, though if there are any copyright violations, original research, or synthesis, I cannot verify myself. The coverage is broad, and stays focused on the topic. The article is written neutrally, and the images used are relevant, and follow Wikipedia's copyright guidelines.

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

Overall, very well-written article, but there are a few sentences I'd like to comment on:

• That she prepares the potion herself is a distinctive plot element among film depictions of Tristan and Isolde
  • There's nothing inherently wrong with this sentence, but I'd personally write it as "The fact that she ..." or "Her preparing the potions herself is...". This isn't specifically related to any GA criteria, but I just felt like commenting on it.
    • I modified this to "Her preparation of the potion is ...", how does that sound? DanCherek (talk) 17:16, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
• The scene in which Tristan drifts out to sea after battling Morholt was a dangerous one to film due to the high surf conditions.
  • This seems like a description given by someone. Who said this?
    • This was from Peter Genée, one of the producers, from the Kerdelhue source (in German):

      "Nur als er nach dem siegreich bestandenen Zweikampf in einen dieser alten Kahne - genannt courroughs - steigen musste, das heisst 'schwer verwundet' sich aufs offene Meer abtreiben lassen musste - und man sieht im film wie ungeheuer hoch die Brandung geht - da hatten wir alle Angst, er konnte es nicht schaffen."

      I tweaked the sentence to make it clear that it came from Genée. DanCherek (talk) 17:16, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
• The breakdown of the state, caused by Tristan and Isolde's rebellion against the established order, is inevitable.
  • Does this line lead on from the previous one, e.g. that it exemplifies economic determinism in some way? If so, you could find some way to connect the two sentences (without synthesis, obviously)
  • Is it someone's analysis of the story? I see that it's cited to Keppler-Tasaki, so perhaps this should be attributed in text. E.g. "The breakdown of the state, [...], is characterised by [so and so] as inevitable." If you want to connect it to the previous line, you could write "... is similarly characterised by...", or something like that.
    • Restructured this sentence a bit, hopefully the similarities are clearer (that both Grimbert and Keppler-Tasaki are commenting on the individuals' rebellion against the social order), and added attribution for Keppler-Tasaki: "Keppler-Tasaki similarly comments on Tristan and Isolde's rebllion against the established order, observing that it inevitably leads to the breakdown of society." DanCherek (talk) 17:16, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
• Unlike Excalibur, the film did not achieve commercial success. An estimated 15,000 tickets were sold when it was shown in theatres
  • You could write these as one sentence instead of two, e.g. "... did not achieve commercial success, with an estimated 15,000 tickets being sold when..."
    • I changed it as you suggested, thanks. DanCherek (talk) 17:16, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Not much else to comment on. Again, very well-written, so this will probably pass, given that the issues above are resolved. ArcticSeeress (talk) 14:56, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

@ArcticSeeress: Thanks very much for the review! I responded to each of your comments above, let me know what you think. DanCherek (talk) 17:16, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Everything looks good. I've been able to access some of the sources (though not all of them) and verify some info, and everything seems to check out. I will assume good faith about the sources I cannot access. I have nothing else to comment on, so nice work! ArcticSeeress (talk) 17:24, 2 June 2022 (UTC)