Jump to content

Talk:The Danish Poet

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleThe Danish Poet has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 13, 2008Good article nomineeListed

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:The Danish Poet/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Hi, I will be reviewing your article The Danish Poet for GA. Initially the article looks very good and seems to be well referenced. I will be adding comments as I go through it again. Please contact me if you have any questions or comments. —Mattisse (Talk) 21:42, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • In this sentence, you should not switch to the first person until you are actually into the quote: Kove's first ideas for The Danish Poet began when she went through a period of self-assessment and wanted to write a story based on a person's origins—when you realize that your own existence is a "complex web of all kinds of stuff, like genetic make-up, upbringing, coincidences, choices you made along the way, missed opportunities, [and] lucky breaks".
In other words, it should be "she went through a period of self-assessment and wanted to write a story base on a person's origins-when that person realizes that his own existence is a "complex web etc." or some version of that.
  • "She felt that it was natural to centre on a relationship between two people..." - What does "it" refer to?
    • Nothing really... "it" doesn't always have to refer to something, or it's some grammatical thing where "it" refers to an implied word that's not said... I'm not really sure (i.e. "it was raining", "it's normal to be afraid", etc.) At any rate I'll change it to read "it was a natural choice", as that sounds better. Mr. Absurd (talk) 01:28, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • She "pitched her script" to what organization? Who financed and backed the film? How was it promoted?
    • I guess it's not clear here, but what happened is that she worked at the NFB as an assistant, and then pitched a script to the NFB while working there, which eventually led to her beginning a career as an animator/director. Then she wrote and produced this film. Does that make sense? (I've expanded this in the article, so take a look and tell me if it's clear). Mr. Absurd (talk) 01:28, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should you not have a "Legacy" or "Impact" section describing the effect this production had on animated films after its release?
  • Have you covered everything of importance that went into the animation. Is there more to be said than it is "traditional"; is there anything unique or individualistic about it?
  • Good job!
Final GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  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):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Mattisse (Talk) 18:41, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]