Talk:Thor: The Dark World/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Prashant! (talk · contribs) 03:22, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

First, Refrences. Checkout if all the refrences are consistent. In some, publisher's name is wikilinked but, other's don't link. —Prashant 05:30, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Done. -Fandraltastic (talk) 12:27, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Now lead, this sentence seems too long...split it into two sentences. "The film was directed by Alan Taylor, with a screenplay by Christopher Yost, Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely,[3] and stars Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, Tom Hiddleston, Anthony Hopkins, Stellan Skarsgård, Idris Elba, Christopher Eccleston, Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, Kat Dennings, Ray Stevenson, Zachary Levi, Tadanobu Asano, Jaimie Alexander and Rene Russo."—Prashant 17:11, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

You can say...It stars Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman and Tom Hiddleston. With.....(the rest) in supporting roles. Or something like that.—Prashant 17:14, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Plot section is very large. It needs some trimming (if it can be done). More than the required rule.—Prashant 17:17, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Split that lead sentence in two. The plot is 638 words, well within the suggested range. -Fandraltastic (talk) 17:19, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

• Reception

Why predecessor is linked at second/third occuring and not at first occuring?—Prashant 18:33, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

It shouldn't be linked at all, removed it. -Fandraltastic (talk) 18:41, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Too much quotes all over the article, some of them should be paraphrased especially the whole production and marketing section.—Prashant 18:36, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Some of them are paraphrased, and there's no guideline against using direct quotations. -Fandraltastic (talk)

I agree, the use of quotations in this article is well within good article standards and quite a few of them are paraphrased.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:59, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

I didn't mean that all should be paraphrased but, at least 2-3 from those two sections. Its fine if you don't want to change it. Other than that the article has no problem.—Prashant 01:22, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Pretty good effort overall, thanks for addressing the points.—Prashant 01:29, 23 March 2014 (UTC)