Talk:Trey Parker/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
I'll be reviewing this article shortly. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:58, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
Some prose glitches and info in the lead that isn't in the body of the article.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
some unreliable sources, some statements that need citations, and some citations that do not support the information being cited.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Needs more development of other aspects of his life and some more development of the religious quotes given.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
Religiuos quotes given without context
It is stable.
No edit wars etc.:
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):
little to no discussion of the screenshot in the article.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Specific concerns

Although the Stan Marsh shot has a fair use rationale for its inclusion, I'm not sure it qualifies for use in this article. There is little to no discussion of the image in the article.
Current refs 2 and 3 are lacking publishers and last access dates, which are required for WP:V.
Copyvio concerns with the tv.com site. The first sentence of "early life" is very close to the first sentence of the tv.com article.
I'm unclear what the position on religion has to do with anything. It's just thrown out there, undeveloped. Given this is a BLP, you need to explain a bit more why you're including this information.
You mention in the lead that Matt Stone is a college friend, but it's not mentioned in the body of the article. All information in the lead should be in the body of the article also.
Need a citation for the second and third sentences of the first paragraph of Early life.
What makes http://www.spscriptorium.com/ a reliable source?
Likewise http://www.spschat.com/?
Prose .. a LOT of your sentences start ... "In (year)..." consider varying this to other phrasing.
Career section, first paragraph, second sentence. "... one called Kenny who looked like Cartman..." .. who is Cartman? He's not been mentioned previously.
There is nothing in the body of the article on the developement, etc. of South Park. If that's what he's mainly known for, this should be developed more in the body of the article.
OR problem: Career section, second paragraph, third sentence "In 1999, Parker and Stone made South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut, which gave the series promience." the source given does not support the "which gave the series promience." statement.
Need citation for the first two sentences of the second paragraph of career section.
Need a citation for the eighth sentence of the second paragraph of Career. "The content was so extreme that it was cancelled after two shows aired."
Need a citation for "In 2001, they also created That's My Bush!, another television series. Despite great reviews, the show was cancelled after one season for the cost per episode."
Need a citation for the "The film was given positive reviews."
Need a citation for the fact that South Park is still producing new episodes.
This is a biography, so it should use the {{persondata}} template.
Is he married? Children? Anything else on his personal life? What are his influences on his work?

I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:40, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since no work has been done on this article in the 7 day hold, nor have I heard anything, I am failing this article. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:00, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]