Jump to content

Talk:Ralph Breaks the Internet/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: Some Dude From North Carolina (talk · contribs) 02:43, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notes

[edit]
@Chompy Ace: Sorry about the delay. I'll be adding some suggestions soon... Some Dude From North Carolinawanna talk? 01:13, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Chompy Ace 01:14, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox and lead

[edit]
  • Infobox looks good, but the cinematography differences between Nathan Detroit Warner and Brian Leach probably needs a reference.
 Done added ref Chompy Ace 02:26, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The reference after "...new cast members added in 2018" isn't working for me, so it should be marked as dead.
 Done Chompy Ace 02:23, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The claim in the lead that this is the "first sequel from the studio after Fantasia 2000" seems like a lie, as this is the studio's third sequel (after The Rescuers Down Under and Fantasia 2000), so I suggest changing the word "after" to "since", to make the statement true.
 Done Chompy Ace 01:41, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Plot

[edit]
  • Plot is 662 words.
 Done Chompy Ace 02:23, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove the comma between "scrap Sugar Rush, and unplugs".
 Done Chompy Ace 02:24, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Add a hyphen in between "video sharing".
 Done Chompy Ace 02:24, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the plot section, the first sentence should probably have a link to the first film.
 Not done per MOS:EASTEREGG (example: Special:Diff/983398711) Chompy Ace 02:21, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: It's possible to rephrase the sentence to say something like "In the six years since the first film" or "In the six years since Wreck-It Ralph" but I'm on the fence as to whether the link is needed. I like the phrasing of "in the six years since" better than "six years after" (hence why I wrote the hypotheticals that way, but I don't know whether or not the link is needed. - Purplewowies (talk) 16:50, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Done reworded sentence Chompy Ace 21:36, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The sentence "Inside the Internet, depicted as a place where websites are buildings in a sprawling city, avatars represent users, and programs are people" seems entirely off to me, as it was supposed to say something else, but just stopped mid-sentence. It should either be rephrased or merged with the previous sentence.
 Done merged Chompy Ace 02:29, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and brought to the deep web" --> "and is brought to the deep web"
 Done--also removed a comma splice just before the "and". - Purplewowies (talk) 06:59, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The sentences ending with "vendor Double Dan" and starting with "Dan provides" should probably be merged to avoid repetitiveness.
 Done: It's possible it could be further rephrased to be slightly better, but I went for what felt best between changing "Dan" to ",who" (what I went for) vs. "He" (would have left it as two sentences). - Purplewowies (talk) 07:03, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cast

[edit]
  • Add "Sergeant" in front of Calhoun, per the reference provided.
 Done: Technically she's listed as Calhoun in the cast list (on both movies), but her credit is listed similarly on the first movie's page. - Purplewowies (talk) 00:38, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • On the topic of KnowsMore, I couldn't find any mention of the "UPA "limited animation" films", "Professor Owl", or "Adventures in Music" in the citation provided".
 Done: I think I remember vaguely seeing UPA get added at a time when I was indisposed and couldn't confirm its addition so it was probably WP:OR by someone. Rephrased to match actual influences mentioned in source. - Purplewowies (talk) 00:38, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • No reason why Ed O'Neill's character, Mr. Litwak, can't have a reference to a secondary source (like this one), rather than one in which he appears in a basic cast list.
 Done replaced with secondary source Chompy Ace 01:45, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Chompy Ace 01:47, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The 2nd, 3rd, and 4th paragraphs in this section heavily rely on this primary source, which I find troubling as there are various secondary sources that would be better to use per the good article criteria and WP:RSPRIMARY, such as this one that contains most of the information in the paragraphs listed.
 Done PDF Press kit (primary source) reference being replaced with the British Film Institute and Fandango Media references in their respective paragraphs. Chompy Ace 02:44, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • References to mere mentions of a character, but not the voice actor, such as this one, should be replaced. Luckily, I found a reference that can be used instead.
 Fixed replaced with Fandango Media reference instead, WP:RS/CBM shows Comicbookmovie.com WP:USERGENERATED Chompy Ace 21:45, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why are there citations to the literal movie when there are plenty of other secondary sources, such as the one listed above?
 Fixed replaced with Fandango Media reference Chompy Ace 21:45, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The claim that "recordings of Tim Allen as Buzz Lightyear are recycled from Toy Story" needs a reference.
 Fixed merged Chompy Ace 22:24, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]
  • No mention of "Kong Ralph" or "Ralphzilla" in either of these two references.
Comment: This is a quick "what I can find on a first-page Google search" and I haven't looked into its reliability or use as a source, but "Ralphzilla" at least was used in this academic (I think) source discussing the process of creating him. (I haven't looked around for Kong Ralph to figure where that one came from. (EDIT 01:35, 11 January 2021 (UTC): Kong Ralph is used on some concept art, but unless it's in the movie art book the only published sources I can find are Tumblr blogs (admittedly ostensibly belonging to Disney animators but)....) - Purplewowies (talk) 01:32, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Done as of Special:PermanentLink/999620065#Popular culture cameos and references Chompy Ace 03:02, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • For the cameo from Imagine Dragons, replace the primary source with a secondary one, such as this one.
 Done Chompy Ace 21:21, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • A lot of one-sentence paragraphs in this section. Try merging them into two or three larger paragraphs.
 Done Chompy Ace 22:24, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change "During the production" to "During production".
 Done Chompy Ace 00:27, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove the (parentheses) around "after Godzilla".
 Done Chompy Ace 00:27, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Production

[edit]

Development

[edit]
  • The claim that talk about a sequel started in "October 2012" has a reference from March 2013.
 Fixed Chompy Ace 22:26, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • A reference is needed for the claim that Moore said they "barely scratched the surface".
 Done added reference. Chompy Ace 22:34, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Two sentences in this section mention that Mario was going to appear, and then, that's it. Was there a reason the character wasn't included?
From memory, Rich Moore is on record in a more recent (read: 2018) interview saying there just wasn't a good place to fit him (like, as in, they tried and it didn't work tonally). I don't have time to look right this moment, but that's a breadcrumb for anyone else, in case it gets done by someone else by the time I go snooping for the source. - Purplewowies (talk) 22:32, 11 January 2021 (UTC) (EDIT: I think I'm confusing it with a source describing why he wasn't included in the first film. There were a lot of articles (of varying reliability) discussing his potential inclusion in the sequel, but no reason was divulged concerning his lack of inclusion there that I can find. - Purplewowies (talk) 23:52, 11 January 2021 (UTC))[reply]
 Done removed Mario found in sentences and references Chompy Ace 22:44, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Ralph leaving the arcade and wrecking the Internet" isn't mentioned in this reference. The quote is actually "Ralph leaves the arcade and wrecks the Internet". Swap them.
 Done Chompy Ace 22:37, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Chiming in to say I provided a copyedit here, because all the ways to keep "focus" in the sentence were really weird. - Purplewowies (talk) 22:40, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Noticing that the norm in this article is that once a person is mentioned in a certain section, the next time only their last name will be used. So in the second-to-last sentence, Phil Johnston should be changed to just Johnston.
 Done Chompy Ace 22:39, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The new reference from IndieWire is from January 2013, so I suggest looking for other references and updating the first sentence of this section to correctly state when talk about a sequel first began (Here's an early reference from December 2012).
Comment: For reference, using Wreck-It Ralph Wiki's page for the sequel (purely because it's largely a copy of a much earlier revision of this article, right down to many of the references), the October 2012 claim from earlier is probably connected to this interview. I don't know how or if that one should be used (and there are likely other ones), but I wanted to add that context before I went digging deeper. (EDIT 23:59, 11 January 2021 (UTC): That source connected to a similar "October 2012" sentence on the original article, before the section there was gutted once the sequel actually came about. In fact, I think the phrasing and sourcing there was directly copied to this article.) - Purplewowies (talk) 23:56, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article from September 2012: /Film interview that references earlier ideas for the sequel than the internet one (might have time to look later for more similarly old sources but am getting pulled away). - Purplewowies (talk) 00:08, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think that the /Film source above might be the best to use as it's the earliest. However, there's no need to go through its content, but instead, just mention that in September 2012, Rich Moore said that there were already ideas for a sequel. Some Dude From North Carolinawanna talk? 00:35, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Chompy Ace 00:49, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Link the first mention of Rich Moore.
 Done Chompy Ace 02:17, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Writing

[edit]
  • The sentence "In 'Ralph Breaks the Internet,' any person who uses the internet has a little avatar version of themselves that does their business for them" seems irrelevant to what Jim Reardon was trying to say. The first two sentences are already enough, so remove the one I just mentioned.
 Done Chompy Ace 02:39, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The use of the word "wanting" in the same sentence twice seems repetitive, so I suggest swapping it with something else.
 Fixed Chompy Ace 02:37, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The design of the scenes within the Internet was based on tours" --> "The designs of scenes within the Internet were based on tours".[a]
 Done Chompy Ace 02:25, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The claim that One Wilshire serves the "most traffic around the Pacific Ocean" needs a reference.
 Done removed "most traffic around the Pacific Ocean" sentence Chompy Ace 02:30, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "remains mostly intact through production" --> "remained mostly intact through production."[a]
 Done Chompy Ace 02:25, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The final sentence in this section has related information about the writing process but looks like it would fit better in #Animation. It should either be moved or merged.
 Done moved sentence to the first paragraph of the section Animation Chompy Ace 02:42, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The designs of the scenes" --> "The designs of scenes".[a]
 Done Chompy Ace 04:35, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The last sentence ending with "intact through production" needs a reference.
 Done "intact through production" removed, added reference as sourced, trimming sentence Chompy Ace 04:52, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The last sentence news feels incomplete and needs to be rewritten.
 Done rewritten sentence Chompy Ace 13:42, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Casting

[edit]
  • New section, so make Reilly's name full, and link it to John C. Reilly.
 Done Chompy Ace 02:31, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • First sentence seems incomplete with the date(s) of when each of the voice actors was cast.
 Done Chompy Ace 02:35, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • It should probably be mentioned who Alan Tudyk voiced in the first film in prose.
 Done Chompy Ace 02:32, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Chompy Ace 02:34, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Done sentence moved to casting Chompy Ace 04:44, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "after previously voiced" --> "after previously voicing"[a]
 Done Chompy Ace 04:44, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The team" --> "The production team on the film"[a]
 Done Chompy Ace 04:44, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Animation

[edit]
  • First sentence feels too short, so I suggest merging it with the second.
 Done merged Chompy Ace 14:03, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The sentences starting with "One of the Disney animators" and "He was also the original" can be merged by making it "...Mark Henn, who was also..."
 Done Chompy Ace 14:05, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The reference provided also mentions that he helped on Ariel, so that should be included as well.
 Done Chompy Ace 14:14, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "as many viewers had pointed out that she was given" --> "as many viewers had pointed out that she was also given"[a]
 Done Chompy Ace 14:06, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • This reference doesn't mention that the "pancake" scene was "one of the initial scenes created for the film".
 Done see below Chompy Ace 14:16, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The phrasing is weird on that now in relation to coming off of the previous paragraph, which is about a different scene (it makes it sound like the bunny/kitty scene is the same scene as the princess scene)... but I'm having trouble determining the best way to phrase that it's different. (Also, possibly relevant, possibly unimportant aside: It was definitely released early on even if it wasn't created early on, but I don't know if there's a source that covers that. (D'oh, the existing source does.)) - Purplewowies (talk) 14:23, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Tried to rephrase to make the scene sound distinct from the prior one but don't know if that makes the sentence structure confusing at all--it was the best I could come up with. - Purplewowies (talk) 14:30, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The way it is now is 99.9% perfect, so no changes needed. Thanks for the improvement! Some Dude From North Carolinawanna talk? 14:36, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change "and was heavily discussed in the buzz about the film; however, the scene was cut in the film" to "and was heavily discussed prior to the film's release; however, the scene was eventually cut from the film."
 Done Chompy Ace 14:08, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Music and soundtrack

[edit]
  • "The soundtrack is composed" --> "The soundtrack was composed"[a]
 Done Chompy Ace 14:06, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Release

[edit]
  • The claim that the film was released in "3D, 2D, Dolby Cinema, IMAX 3D, and 4DX" needs a reference.
I think some sources exist for 3D and/or IMAX, though I'm combing for what may be reliable or best (Dolby is in this boat as well). 2D is a given... 4DX has a blog post review mentioning it exists, but I think the closest to reliability is this post by the verified 4DX Facebook page. (Is that good enough, in the absence of a more secondary source?) - Purplewowies (talk) 18:37, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Purplewowies: The Facebook citation is fine as long as other references are added for the film's 3D, 2D, Dolby Cinema, and IMAX 3D releases. Some Dude From North Carolinawanna talk? 19:31, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Done removed "3D, 2D, Dolby Cinema, IMAX 3D, and 4DX" claim, the same way as Wreck-It Ralph#Release Chompy Ace 22:08, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The citation after "Purple" is subscription-only, so it should be tagged accordingly.
 Done - Purplewowies (talk) 18:37, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reception

[edit]

Box office

[edit]
  • The first reference after "five-day opening weekend", gave me the following error message: "503 Service Temporarily Unavailable". Mark the citation as dead, or remove it.
 Done: Page was actually still live, so I updated its url so it wouldn't hit an error. - Purplewowies (talk) 18:44, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • References are needed for the claims that the film made "$18.5 million on its first day" and "another $10.3 million on its second".
 Done and comment: Removed as I couldn't find a reliable source for those numbers. (Side note I noticed while poring through some sources: This reliable reference (AFP) was removed at some point for no clear reason and cites a higher weekend total of 56.2 mil which the article also used to say. (And it's from after the weekend is actually over (9pm EST November 26 (from a Daily Mail syndication of the story) is the earliest date of publication I can find for it)--the Deadline source cited for 55.7 is actually before the end of the weekend (morning of November 25) and appears to be an estimation of how the weekend was going to finish.) Should that source be reinstated and the number changed, or should 55.7 be left as-is? - Purplewowies (talk) 19:14, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Purplewowies: I don't think the removal of both claims was a good idea as film articles normally have their first-day gross. Luckily, I managed to find both numbers on the film's official Box Office Mojo page, so they should be brought back. Some Dude From North Carolinawanna talk? 19:37, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
How did I not come across that when looking? Readded (and used the weekend page at BOM to support 56.2 once more since it appears more sources are using that count vs 55). - Purplewowies (talk) 21:44, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Done though that article contradicts itself; the top says 93.5 (probably where this article gets it) and says 93.6 lower down. - Purplewowies (talk) 19:15, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per above, this reference should be swapped with a different citation as it contradicts itself (you can use this or this).
 Done: Changed to the first (though I still need to round up archive urls and such). - Purplewowies (talk)

Critical response

[edit]
  • "describes" --> "described"
 Done - Purplewowies (talk) 19:16, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change "...Disney films" and "soars when it..." to "...Disney films", stating that it "soars when it..."
 Done - Purplewowies (talk) 19:16, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the last sentence in the first paragraph, change "4 out of 5 stars" to "4 stars out of 5" as it just makes it sound better.
 Done Chompy Ace 22:03, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Chompy Ace 22:03, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why is the word "also" included in the sentence "also gave the film"? It's the first 3/4 rating given in the paragraph.
 Done removed the word also Chompy Ace 22:03, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Chris Bumbray didn't actually say the film was better than Ready Player One, he just compared the films positively to one another.
 Done changed Chompy Ace 22:03, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Chompy Ace 22:03, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "gave the film 2.5 score" --> "gave the film a 2.5 score".
 Done Chompy Ace 22:03, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Accolades

[edit]
  • Shouldn't this list be sorted by name, rather than by date to make it easier for readers?
 Done now sorted by name in alphabetical order Chompy Ace 03:11, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove "(as Vanellope)" per consistency.
 Done Chompy Ace 20:26, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • For the Academy Award citation, Clark Spencer isn't mentioned, so I would look for a reference in which he is or just remove his name.
 Done replaced with Oscars reference, this mentions Spencer Chompy Ace 20:26, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, per the Spider Man 2 GAN, I suggest replacing (or adding) references to mere "nominations" to those containing actual verdicts.
 Done Chompy Ace 22:57, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Satellite Award ceremony took place on February 22, not February 17.
 Fixed Chompy Ace 20:28, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change "San Diego Film Critics Society Awards 2018" to "San Diego Film Critics Society Awards" per consistency.
 Done Chompy Ace 22:57, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change "Tom Macdougall" to his actual name, "Tom MacDougall".
 Done Chompy Ace 23:05, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Could "rowspans" be added to the references column? No need to have 3 or more consecutive citations of the same thing.
I specifically removed those because of possible accessibility concerns (diff) (sometimes screen readers (old ones, particularly), as well as text-based web browsers, can present row/col-spans in ways that make it confusing which cells apply to what, especially when they come after non-spanned rows). (Granted, the guideline I followed was a "bonus" criterion (i.e. it's a "cool, but you don't HAVE to push it" guideline), but nonetheless.) Mentioning that caveat so that it's known, whatever happens. - Purplewowies (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Done per above Chompy Ace 00:38, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per consistency, other nominee lists with multiple nominees should have an "and" in between the second to last, and the last, nominee.
 Done Chompy Ace 23:05, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove the commas in between "Joyce Tong, for 'Ralphzilla'" and "David Hutchins, for 'Virus Infection & Destruction'"
 Done Chompy Ace 23:05, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Done added Chompy Ace 23:33, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Done added Chompy Ace 00:00, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Only the "Favorite Animated Movie" Kids' Choice Award nomination is mentioned, but the film was also nominated for "Favorite Female Voice from an Animated Movie".
 Done added Chompy Ace 00:38, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Future

[edit]
  • No problems at the moment in this section, but this reference seems like it could also be included, along with its content.
 Done, reference is not needed Chompy Ace 00:41, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Other

[edit]
  • The only reference that needs to be archived is the one from Metacritic.
 Done Chompy Ace 09:19, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think it's common for a film to have a hatnote to its soundtrack, so to be consistent, I would remove it.
 Done Chompy Ace 09:19, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • No images? Not even for a notable actor in the film (main or cameo), writer, or director? This is optional, but it would [look] better if this article had some images...
 Done added image which is Alan Tudyk at Casting subsection per Special:Diff/999486186 Chompy Ace 12:27, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Some references have their dates in "dmy" form, so I suggest adding the "use mdy dates" template at the start of the article to fix this.
 Done Chompy Ace 14:20, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reference 21, currently placed in the voice cast section after the sentence ending with "Katherine Von Till", has an archive link that, somehow, redirects to the original article.
 Fixed removed reference Chompy Ace 23:36, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The archive for reference 59, currently placed in the "music and soundtrack" subsection after the sentence ending with "Imagine Dragons' YouTube channel", is unusable as it was excluded from the Wayback Machine. A new archive should be created, probably from another archiving website like archive.vn.
 Fixed Chompy Ace 23:42, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Same thing goes for the archive for reference 85, currently in the "Critical response" subsection, after the sentence ending with "our apps and, yes, our brand".
 Fixed Chompy Ace 23:47, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Both parts of the cite bundle for the "San Diego Film Critics Society Awards" should be archived, including this press release.
 Done Chompy Ace 23:33, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Overview

[edit]

Final notes

[edit]
  • The following websites should not be italicized in the references they appear in:[b]
 Done - Purplewowies (talk) 01:42, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The following website should be italicized in the references they appear in:[d]
 Done Chompy Ace 01:47, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change the uses of Slashfilm to /Film.
 Done Chompy Ace 01:47, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Chompy Ace 01:47, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Chompy Ace 01:47, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mark the reference for the Detroit Film Critics Society Awards as dead so that readers are sent to the archived link from 2018, rather than the current one from 2019.
 Done Chompy Ace 01:47, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Done - Purplewowies (talk) 01:42, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GAN table

[edit]
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:

· · ·

Notes

  1. ^ a b c d e f g Wanted changes are in bold
  2. ^ This can be fixed by swapping the reference's "website" parameter with "publisher".
  3. ^ Also fix the # featured in the reference.
  4. ^ The following website is already italicized in some references, but not in all of the ones they appear in.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ralph_Breaks_the_Internet/GA1&oldid=1002943064"