Jump to content

Talk:Money Heist/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: Kingsif (talk · contribs) 05:53, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]


I'm planning on reviewing this, I'll get the review up hopefully tomorrow. Kingsif (talk) 05:53, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Kingsif, thank you for your time. Before you start the review, I want you to know that a new "Themes and analysis" section was added after the article was nominated for GAN, and this section is still incomplete. I guess it will take me about 3 days to add two paragraphs to make the section complete in my eyes. This shouldn't hinder the GAN though. – sgeureka t•c 08:31, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks - I can hold off on finishing the review until it's complete if you want? Kingsif (talk) 16:02, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say the article is fine until the Themes section, so you can certainly start with the review. I just want the GA flag (if the article gets one) to be given out after I've finished the Themes section, so that a somewhat complete revision will show up in the {{Article history}} milestones. I expect User:Vaselineeeeeeee as the GA nominator to primarily address any GAN concerns, but I'll certainly help as time permits. – sgeureka t•c 16:44, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 16:46, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks guys! I'll get started and paste it in here soon! Kingsif (talk) 16:51, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Style

[edit]
  • Lead good length for article.
  • Good managing of sentence length in lead
  • "It involves eight robbers, code-named after cities, focusing on Tokyo (Úrsula Corberó), and led by the Professor (Álvaro Morte) from an external location, as they battle with hostages on the inside, and the police on the outside." - though distracted by the clauses, this is a bit out grammatically. Perhaps "It involves eight robbers, code-named after cities and led by the Professor (Álvaro Morte) from an external location. The story is primarily focused on one of the robbers, Tokyo (Úrsula Corberó), as they battle with hostages on the inside and the police on the outside."
  • The term "unrivaled heist" reads odd and feels incomplete, perhaps make it "heist that would be unrivaled in both complexity and winnings"
  • "querulent" is a nice word. But most people understand "suspicious" a lot better.
  • In the sentence beginning "At the end of part 2...", does "the Mint" really need to be repeated? And maybe add a "but" in front of "at the cost of the lives..."
  • I don't recall if the Professor declares "DEFCON 2", it seems like a very US reference. Is this what he says in the show? If not, perhaps the equivalent idea but with a more internationally-friendly phrase could be used?
  • Series overview generally well-written, hitting main points with good structure and not falling into "telling the story"
  • The lead calls the show Money Heist, but the body calls it La Casa de Papel. Is there a reason for this?
  • Maybe put the parenthesis (see Themes and analysis) in a note
  • "and to keep the audience interested" sounds a little basic compared to the analysis that just precedes it, how about simply "and retain their interest through the show"
  • "pop-culture-like" seems like a forced adjective; maybe something like "because of Dalí's recognisable visage that also serves as an iconic cultural reference to Spain"
  • side note: I'm picturing the creators looking at viewership figures saying "what about Madrid, Sevilla, and Palma?" "No, we need to spread them out" "How about one from Latin America and two going up the Mediterranean coast?" "Great idea"
  • Conception generally written well and progresses well
  • The second sentence is a run-on that loses its direction from "... who did not follow archetype conventions otherwise". Perhaps split it between "process" and "which" for two sentences that stand independently well?
  • "Noted similarities between Berlin and Najwa Nimri's character Zulema in Pina's TV series Locked Up were unintentional" - who noted these similarities? ("Similarities between... noted by X were unintentional")
  • Tokyo is "protagonist and narrator", no?
  • Sentence about Tokyo also a run-on that loses direction; split in two again, after "hardest to develop", perhaps?
  • When mentioning the Netflix renewal cast, could change "including Pedro Alonso" to "; this included Pedro Alonso" to prevent run on clauses
  • Made some tweaks just on minor practical stuff around here
  • In filming, introducing the filming locations with "Although" means that sentence should be constructed differently. Perhaps reformat? (if it's in the sources, also add why the Mint couldn't be filmed i.e. legal/practical/financial reasons, I assume). Example might be "Although the storyline is set at the Royal Mint of Spain in Madrid, primary exterior scenes had to be filmed at the Spanish National Research Council (CSIC) headquarters because of X; the CSIC was chosen because of its passing resemblance to the Mint. The roof scenes of the Mint were filmed on the roof of the Higher Technical School of Aeronautical Engineers, part of..."
  • I'd suggest keeping the info on filming locations for the Mint together, rather than having the estate in between.
  • Could say "Parts 3 and 4 were also filmed back-to-back"
  • In the second sentence of 3 & 4 filming, change "while" to "and"; in the third sentence change "triple" to "three times" (it reads more professionally). Is it that the new centre was 3x the size of A. the sets for 1 & 2 or B. the previous Netflix centre? If B, I don't think this is relevant, because the show wasn't at the old centre; if A, maybe change "installment" to a more accurate term.
  • Perhaps change to "Florence in Italy" so people don't think Panama is a city in Thailand (unlikely, yes; impossible? no.)
  • The first sentence of the Music section should be restructured: even though I know the sequence, I was thinking of physically against a paper model. I'd move the mention of the title sequence closer to the start of the sentence
    •  Done "The series' theme song is entitled "My Life Is Going On" by Spanish composer Manel Santisteban, who approached Spanish singer Cecilia Krull to write and perform the lyrics, which are about having confidence in one's abilities and the future. Krull's main source of inspiration was the character Tokyo in the first episode of the series. The theme song is played behind a title sequence featuring paper models of major settings from the series. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 17:12, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The mention of the narration in terms of Bella ciao needs contextualising; adding "Regarding the use of the song," before the sentence should work
  • Made one tweak, but Original broadcast & str.. section written very summately. Good writing.
  • Wikilink "bible" in Renewal section to Bible (screenwriting)
  • Little note to consider adding the British English template to the talk page; the spelling and several grammatical quirks I'm seeing in the article are British, and it doesn't take anything for well-meaning American editors to drive-by "correct" a handful of them if it's not laid out, ruining the consistency of the article
  • Consider restructuring the sentence beginning "With writing being in progress..." - not incorrect, but two gerunds is a bit awkward. Could also mention that he gave an interview while writing on the show was in progress, which gives a reason for mentioning the writing-in-progress element that is otherwise irrelevant to what Pina says.
  • Re sentence "Viewers would also be more likely..." - do they say that this is because of the shorter episodes or just in general? If just in general, perhaps rephrase to not imply it's because of the episode length, also mention who said it if not from Pina.
  • I had no idea the show was dubbed.
  • Maybe change "American viewers" to "viewers in the US". America, for the most part, speaks Spanish.
  • In the themes section, I don't think "Anglo-Saxon" is the best term. Maybe Anglo-centric is what's intended?
  • Maybe "peculiarities" could be changed to "sensibilities" (more common term in media studies and less derogative)
  • Every time I read "strategic perfect crime" I feel it should be the other way round - the "perfect strategic crime", what do you think? Of course, in the context in this sentence, the sentence might sound better if it was turned into "the strategic planning of a perfect crime"
  • "greater tension" change to "increased tension"
  • "In lesser regard" is used in an odd way. Maybe replace with "Less discussed is the idea that", or just ditch
  • Since the comedic elements offset the heist tension like the emotional aspects do, this should be brought up above the opening credits part
  • Generally good paragraph on the financial crisis but not sure what New Statesman adds re. analysis, and the Esquire review section could be edited to reflect that all the information is a review interpretation - adding more sentences in WP voice seems like it's original spin-off interpretation. Attribution should work, or tagging like: "On the other hand, Esquire's Mireia Mullor saw the Robin Hood analogy as a mere distraction strategy for the robbers, as they initially did not plan to use the money from their first heist to improve the quality of life of regular people; for this reason, Mullor also argues that the large following for the robbers in part 3 was not comprehensible even though they represented a channel for the discontent of those bearing economic and political injustices."
  • The sentence "Berlin may shift the most, from a robber mistreating hostages to one of the series' most beloved characters; additionally, the hostage Mónica Gaztambide and inspector Raquel Murillo eventually join the cause of the robbers" (which I've tweaked for reading ease) still combines different set structures and doesn't read well. Splitting Berlin from Monica and Raquel, and giving an introduction to them (even if just "Some examples include...") would help.
  • Then, the sentence "The audience may regard the robbers as evil at first for committing a crime, but the series eventually marks the financial system as the bad one, as the robbers have an ethical and empathizing justification for robbing an overpowered thief" flat-out needs rewriting, like "Gonzálvez of the Huffington Post finds that an audience may think of the robbers as evil at first for committing a crime, but as the series progresses it marks the financial system as the true evil and suggests the robbers have ethical and empathetic justification for stealing from an overpowered thief"
  • Weird translation in the Najwa Nimri sentence? Presumably "information and technology" broadly refers to ICT and means to say modern media communications? Or, as we know them now, social media? I also don't think "robbers' adversary" is needed. And "might make everyone turn dark" is very casual - if there's a quote for that, please quote it.
  • Maybe in the last sentence "ability to change view/opinion" rather than "shift in opinion"
  • In Viewership section, I feel that the "nearly double the number of its closest competitor" part needs rephrasing - it kind of sounds like Antena 3 got the most viewers for this show, that other channels also broadcast Casa de papel but aren't watched as much. Maybe "taking the majority share of viewers in its timeslot, reaching nearly double the number of the next highest-viewed station/show" or similar?
  • I'd move "to the creators' surprise" to the end of its sentence
  • Oh, why has the show become Money Heist again?
  • And do we need to re-state "La Casa de Papel creator Alex Pina"? Both have been identified a lot, just "Pina" would work - and would also take this away from being a verbatim source quote and so close to copyvio.
  • I've broken up the second paragraph in viewership section to split fans and not-so-fans
  • I've cleaned up the critical reception section because, like with a comment somewhere above, there is a horrible tendency to not keep the views of sources clear, making them sound like Wikipedia's view. Also commented out a part that makes no sense from the German source - if one of you speaks German, could you check the translation please? It seems both unrelated to the rest of the sentence, and contradictory to the conclusion.
  • Have to agree with Adrian, 'Money Heist' is a bad name - House of Paper makes sense on multiple levels in English, they should have kept it
  • Fail for now - generally phrasings that can be improved and sentences to be reconsidered. A quick sweep should do it. Please ping if anything is unclear, or you just want more discussion!

Coverage

[edit]
  • Good spread of coverage in lead
  • When characters introduced in second paragraph of series coverage, should they get their actors' names?
  • Cast list elaborated on and bulleted - nice; I might suggest having a note as well as the ref next to Denver to explain that the official website lists Daniel but in the show he has called himself Ricardo in what appears to be a moment of honesty
  • Is Morte's involvement in another series relevant? I'd also like to re-translate that quote if it's to be kept, because "whitening" in terms of TV? Bad implications.
  • Is it relevant that the real Mint hadn't printed in years? If so, the filming section isn't the appropriate place for that info (unless that's why they couldn't film exterior shots there, which seems really unlikely)
  • Was the sets being destroyed after part 2 the reason why part 3 is set in completely new places? That would be interesting to include
  • Are there more details of the initial Netflix deal? Though the section on broadcast is written well concisely, if there were more details they could be useful.
  • Is there no more analysis? It doesn't have to be everything in the world, but a bit more to puff out the section another paragraph or so might help if it's available.
  • On hold - questions above
@Sgeureka: Could you deal with the rest of these if they are attainable? Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 17:49, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Done – sgeureka t•c 04:01, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Illustration

[edit]
  • Good selection and spread of commons images
  • Has awards table
  • Nice touch of adding a series breakdown at the top
  • Pass

Verifiability

[edit]
  • Some tabloids and gossip magazines in there (The Sun, Hola!, The Express, some others looks dubious) - note The Sun is deprecated; is there nothing but Hola! that knows when part 4 finished filming? Nothing but The Sun that calls the show a crime drama?
  • The Express is seen as unreliable, so even though it's used as a primary source (to show that it uses an incorrect term), given its unreliability, the inaccuracy it is being used to cite could be written off as the fault of being not a very good newspaper, so its presence isn't valuable.
  • Fail for now - uses a deprecated source
I'll deal with these sources. – sgeureka t•c 07:33, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'll find something better for thesun.co.uk and express.co.uk, should be easy. I replaced express.co.uk and thesun.co.uk with the already present sources dramaquarterly.com (see below) and nytimes.com.
  • hola.com[1] provides many instagram posts by the actors/producers who said that filming had finished, and it's IMO the best thing available (I reseached again) except for ref-bombing the articles with these instagram posts. Reliable newspapers haven't started talking about the show again except for the Neymar casting. Netflix hasn't officially confirmed a fourth part, and I read somewhere that Netflix even has a strict anti-spoiler policy about part 4, so reliable newspapers will have neither reason no material to talk about part 4 including that filming has ended. (Of course I will replace the Hola source as soon as something better comes up.) But I consider a quick note about the status of a fourth part important for the article. Not sure. Advice?
  • infobae.com[2] transscribes a "Teleshow" video interview that I can't locate otherwise. I replaced it with two other reliable sources, but unlike infobae, they don't make the point that Flores was the only one skipping the casting process. (I've seen the other actor's auditions, so they obviously didn't skip it.) replaced with another fine source, just in case.
  • xataka.com[3] says they themselves had the interview with the producers, so I think it's okay.
  • dramaquarterly.com[4][5] were at the producers' press conference or had the interviews themselves, so I think it's okay.
  • All other refs should be fine, as far as I can tell as a non-Latin person.
– sgeureka t•c 03:08, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality

[edit]
  • Neutral tone throughout.

Stability

[edit]
  • Stable, undergoing a section development but main editors working cooperatively (see above)
  • Pass
[edit]
  • Title card as fair use
  • Some close paraphrasing in "More than four million viewers watched the premiere of La Casa de Papel on the free-to-air Spanish TV channel Antena 3, nearly double the number of its closest competitor", from BBC; the phrase "relatable and immoral" is an unquoted lift from Drama Quarterly, as is the line "the biggest-budgeted series per episode in the history of Spanish TV" from Variety, the phrase "the most-watched Netflix series and movies of all time in any language, including English" from Variety - I bring these up because they're quite noticeable and long phrases.
  • The rest looks good.
  • Fail for now - some quotation marks might help
I'll deal with this. I didn't know such a great tool existed; it will certainly help me in the future. – sgeureka t•c 07:33, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Done revision – sgeureka t•c 19:35, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Overall

[edit]
The more criticism, the more can and will be improved. Thanks you very much. – sgeureka t•c 07:33, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Of course; there's a lot, so I don't expect you to get it all done straight away - you've responded super fast, I don't mind leaving this on hold for longer than a week. Kingsif (talk) 08:59, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Vaselineeeeeeee: wow! good and quick response, thanks for the hard work! Kingsif (talk) 21:01, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome, guys, I will look over the article again in the next day hopefully Kingsif (talk) 06:13, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Vaselineeeeeeee and Sgeureka: Just gave it one last read, and it looks great. Amazing work, happy to say it's passed. Kingsif (talk) 23:06, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Kingsif: Excellent, thanks for the thorough review! Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 23:12, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Money_Heist/GA1&oldid=916088554"