Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
A good article is—
1. Well written:
(a) the prose is clear and the spelling and grammar are correct;
and
(b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, jargon, words to avoid, fiction, and list incorporation.
I've dealt with the Cast section and the Lead.
SilkTork *
YES!
14:11, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
2. Factually accurate and verifiable:
(a) it provides references to all sources of information, and at minimum contains a section dedicated to the attribution of those sources in accordance with the guide to layout;
(b) at minimum, it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons;
and
(c) it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;
and
(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day-to-day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by images:
(a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content;
and
(b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
Cast section is in list format. Read Wikipedia:FilmPlot#Cast_and_crew_information. The article is rather short, especially when compared with other film good articles. The plot section tends to use opinion and interpretation. Read WP:FILMPLOT. Very little detail in Production section. There is no critical reaction. The general reader learns very little about the film from this article. Sources appear to be good, and check out. The article was started in 2005, but remained a stub until User:Editorofthewiki took it in hand on Nov 16 this year. Editorofthewiki is also the nominator. There are no conflicts. Initial feeling is that this article would need developing before meeting GA criteria. As there is a clear standard ( Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Style guidelines), and many examples for guidance, it is possible with some hard work to bring this up to standard in a short space of time, though it might be worth seeking assistance from Wikipedia:WikiProject Films. SilkTork * YES! 20:06, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
Article needs to be developed. It is worth studying the FilmProject's examples: Start class, B class, GA class. I feel that with a little work on the cast section, production and some critical response this could be raised to B-class. I will put this on hold for seven days, if there's been progress we can talk through how to raise to GA status. SilkTork * YES! 16:47, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
I have just glanced at the article and I can see that a lot of work has been done. Nice one! I'll have a closer look tomorrow morning and see how close we are to meeting the criteria. SilkTork * YES! 01:42, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
I haven't worked on it as I intended. I will try to get at this tonight and hopefully will be able to pass it then. SilkTork * YES! 15:28, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
The initial review of the images is incorrect, the article currently fails criterion 6(a). The main image in the infobox ( File:Drum DVD cover.jpg) has no fair-use rationale and has been tagged as such. I would also say that as currently presented the second non-free image ( File:Drum screenshot.jpg) should not be used in the article. With a caption merely reading "A scene from the film" it does not aid the reader's understanding of the topic as required by criterion 8 of the non-free content criteria. Does the image depict characters mentioned in the article? Does it clearly represent the style of the movie which is discussed in the article? Or is it a depiction of a notable event in the movie? Fair-use images should not be used merely as decoration - which currently seems to be the case in this instance; its purpose in the article and how it helps the reader's understanding of the topic should be firmly established. Guest9999 ( talk) 09:04, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
A good article is—
1. Well written:
(a) the prose is clear and the spelling and grammar are correct;
and
(b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, jargon, words to avoid, fiction, and list incorporation.
I've dealt with the Cast section and the Lead.
SilkTork *
YES!
14:11, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
2. Factually accurate and verifiable:
(a) it provides references to all sources of information, and at minimum contains a section dedicated to the attribution of those sources in accordance with the guide to layout;
(b) at minimum, it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons;
and
(c) it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;
and
(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day-to-day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by images:
(a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content;
and
(b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
Cast section is in list format. Read Wikipedia:FilmPlot#Cast_and_crew_information. The article is rather short, especially when compared with other film good articles. The plot section tends to use opinion and interpretation. Read WP:FILMPLOT. Very little detail in Production section. There is no critical reaction. The general reader learns very little about the film from this article. Sources appear to be good, and check out. The article was started in 2005, but remained a stub until User:Editorofthewiki took it in hand on Nov 16 this year. Editorofthewiki is also the nominator. There are no conflicts. Initial feeling is that this article would need developing before meeting GA criteria. As there is a clear standard ( Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Style guidelines), and many examples for guidance, it is possible with some hard work to bring this up to standard in a short space of time, though it might be worth seeking assistance from Wikipedia:WikiProject Films. SilkTork * YES! 20:06, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
Article needs to be developed. It is worth studying the FilmProject's examples: Start class, B class, GA class. I feel that with a little work on the cast section, production and some critical response this could be raised to B-class. I will put this on hold for seven days, if there's been progress we can talk through how to raise to GA status. SilkTork * YES! 16:47, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
I have just glanced at the article and I can see that a lot of work has been done. Nice one! I'll have a closer look tomorrow morning and see how close we are to meeting the criteria. SilkTork * YES! 01:42, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
I haven't worked on it as I intended. I will try to get at this tonight and hopefully will be able to pass it then. SilkTork * YES! 15:28, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
The initial review of the images is incorrect, the article currently fails criterion 6(a). The main image in the infobox ( File:Drum DVD cover.jpg) has no fair-use rationale and has been tagged as such. I would also say that as currently presented the second non-free image ( File:Drum screenshot.jpg) should not be used in the article. With a caption merely reading "A scene from the film" it does not aid the reader's understanding of the topic as required by criterion 8 of the non-free content criteria. Does the image depict characters mentioned in the article? Does it clearly represent the style of the movie which is discussed in the article? Or is it a depiction of a notable event in the movie? Fair-use images should not be used merely as decoration - which currently seems to be the case in this instance; its purpose in the article and how it helps the reader's understanding of the topic should be firmly established. Guest9999 ( talk) 09:04, 5 January 2009 (UTC)