Jump to content

Talk:Florence Pugh/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: BennyOnTheLoose (talk · contribs) 23:27, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA review
(see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):
    b (citations to reliable sources):
    c (OR):
    d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):
    b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. 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:

· · ·


Happy to discuss, or be challenged on, any of my review comments. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:27, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Images used have suitable Creative Commons licences. Captions are appropriate.
  • Article is stable - no edit wars.


Early Life

  • Seems fine.

Career

  • In considering whether the article follows NPOV, I did do some searching for reviews, given that the article doesn't have any negative ones. I think the article fairly reflects the critical responses, and indeed it includes sources like Thorpe (2017) and O'Connor (2018) that help show that reviews haven't been cherry-picked.
  • Not even average or mixed reviews of her work seem to exist. Believe me, I've searched thoroughly as well.

2014–2018: Early roles

  • "While still in school" - not wrong, but I'd prefer a Sixth form mention as I think most UK readers would then realise she was about 17/18 rather than younger (without having to do the arithmetic from year of birth to 2014). Not a necessary change.
  • Changed the description to While still studying in sixth form to denote an age range and clue in non-UK readers that she was in school.
  • "mystery drama The Falling" - from the sources used here, looks to me more like "just" a drama, or a Coming-of-age story rather than a Mystery film. (I know there is a reference in one source to "mysterious bout of fainting").
  • Removed mystery. I believe you're right in that it was more of a description than an overall genre.
  •  Done
  • "Leir of Britain" - I'm only seeing "King Lear" in the source, and as I didn't know that the Shakespeare play was based on Leir, I'm going to assume there are some other readers who don't know that either. From a quick search, look like it was an updated version of the play, with Hopkins's character just called "Lear". So I think it may be better to replace "Leir of Britain" with "King Lear".
  •  Done

2019–present: Breakthrough and critical recognition

  • Seems fine.

Upcoming projects

  • All three sentences include "star" early on - consider rewording.
  • Changed the first star in to portray and the second to appear in.

Personal life

  • As the source says "thought to have been dating since April 2019" (I've added the bold), the statement "Pugh has been in a relationship with American actor and filmmaker Zach Braff since April 2019." is a bit strong and needs a little tweak or a new source.
  • Changed this to simply state that the two are in a relationship. I think that it would read as tabloid-esque to reference when they reportedly began seeing each other. Do you agree?

Accolades

  • Seems fine.

Infobox and Lead

  • "the mystery film" - see comment under "2014–2018: Early roles"
  •  Done
  • "which won her a" - maybe just "and won"?
  • Changed this to Pugh gained recognition for [...] Lady Macbeth (2016), winning a British Independent Film Award.
  • "Pugh's international breakthrough" - the body text doesn't have "international." I suggest using the same phrase in both places. (Including "international" seems reasonable.)
  •  Done
  • "the period drama" - not included in the body. (I was also wondering if there should be a link to Historical drama, but maybe "period drama" is a common enough phrase).
  • Added genre in the body and links for both mentions.
  • "lattermost" doesn't seem to be a very common word - maybe just "last"? (Optional change.)
  • Changed lattermost to latter since there are only three items listed.

Sources

  • No issues with sources used, and range seems appropriate. There are a couple of queries about sources above. Breadth and depth of the article seems appropriate from what I read in sources.

Thanks for your work on the article, KyleJoan. No major issues from an initial review. I've made some comments above, which I hope are helpful. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:31, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks, KyleJoan. Great work on the article. I think the article is suitably written, structured and referenced to be a GA, with just one tiny outstanding point - "latter" is used to refer to the second of two things, so in the lead you can either restore "lattermost", change to "last", or use a different formulation. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 08:44, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wow. I re-read my explanation for changing it to latter and instantly felt embarrassed. My apologies for that. I've made the change to last, and I believe it works great. KyleJoantalk 08:49, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If we all knew everything, we wouldn't need Wikipedia. Thanks, I'm happy to pass this for GA now. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 09:02, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Florence_Pugh/GA1&oldid=1024302429"