Goodman Beaver is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 9, 2014. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Khazar2 ( talk · contribs) 13:55, 3 January 2013 (UTC) I'll be glad to review this one. I'll do a close readthrough of the text, noting any initial issues, and then begin the criteria checklist. Looking forward to working with you! -- Khazar2 ( talk) 13:55, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
This article looks very strong on a first pass, so I'll go straight to the criteria checklist. -- Khazar2 ( talk) 13:55, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | Overall very strong. Spotchecks of available sources show no evidence of copyright issues. | |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | ||
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | ||
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | ||
2c. it contains no original research. | ||
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | ||
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | ||
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | ||
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 media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | Images are public domain. | |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | Great selection of relevant panels from the comic. | |
7. Overall assessment. |
I would like to get to the bottom of the question of whether or not Harvey Kurtzman's "Goodman Goes Playboy" really lead to his creation of Little Annie Fanny, as this article asserts. I'm not sure we can really say that. From Denis Kitchen, one of the only sources on Kurtzman I currently have ( ref here), we know "Goodman Goes Playboy" certainly was created "well before" Hefner agreed to do Annie. We can deduce that Hefner read it mere days after that (Kitchen says Hefner green-lit "Annie "the day after Christmas" 1961; Hefner would not have seen the Goodman comic until the following month, allowing for it to appear on newsstands a month before its publish date of February 1962). Even if Hefner somehow saw his friend's comic a few days before he told him he would publish Annie, the two had been in discussions for years leading up to those crucial days closing 1961/opening 1962. Unless we have a source otherwise, I believe the Goodman comic and the creation of Annie are two separate things, one really having nothing to do with the other. Prhartcom ( talk) 18:54, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Well, here's more information on this question that I only just this moment read. Nine years after writing the source I mention above, and after reminding us that "Goodman Goes Playboy" appeared in late 1961, Kitchen & Buhle in 2009's The Mad Genius of Comics state, "Hefner, the actual target of the satire, loved the piece, and his subsequent correspondence with Kurtzman led to Goodman's 'sex change' and the 1962 debut of Little Annie Fannie in Playboy" (emphasis mine). Dang. And they even say it "led to" Annie. Now it looks like I have to allocate space in the article to discuss "Goodman Goes Playboy" and write words saying that it was influential in the creation of the strip. Prhartcom ( talk) 22:41, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Goodman Beaver. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:30, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Goodman Beaver is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 9, 2014. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Khazar2 ( talk · contribs) 13:55, 3 January 2013 (UTC) I'll be glad to review this one. I'll do a close readthrough of the text, noting any initial issues, and then begin the criteria checklist. Looking forward to working with you! -- Khazar2 ( talk) 13:55, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
This article looks very strong on a first pass, so I'll go straight to the criteria checklist. -- Khazar2 ( talk) 13:55, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | Overall very strong. Spotchecks of available sources show no evidence of copyright issues. | |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | ||
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | ||
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | ||
2c. it contains no original research. | ||
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | ||
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | ||
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | ||
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 media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | Images are public domain. | |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | Great selection of relevant panels from the comic. | |
7. Overall assessment. |
I would like to get to the bottom of the question of whether or not Harvey Kurtzman's "Goodman Goes Playboy" really lead to his creation of Little Annie Fanny, as this article asserts. I'm not sure we can really say that. From Denis Kitchen, one of the only sources on Kurtzman I currently have ( ref here), we know "Goodman Goes Playboy" certainly was created "well before" Hefner agreed to do Annie. We can deduce that Hefner read it mere days after that (Kitchen says Hefner green-lit "Annie "the day after Christmas" 1961; Hefner would not have seen the Goodman comic until the following month, allowing for it to appear on newsstands a month before its publish date of February 1962). Even if Hefner somehow saw his friend's comic a few days before he told him he would publish Annie, the two had been in discussions for years leading up to those crucial days closing 1961/opening 1962. Unless we have a source otherwise, I believe the Goodman comic and the creation of Annie are two separate things, one really having nothing to do with the other. Prhartcom ( talk) 18:54, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Well, here's more information on this question that I only just this moment read. Nine years after writing the source I mention above, and after reminding us that "Goodman Goes Playboy" appeared in late 1961, Kitchen & Buhle in 2009's The Mad Genius of Comics state, "Hefner, the actual target of the satire, loved the piece, and his subsequent correspondence with Kurtzman led to Goodman's 'sex change' and the 1962 debut of Little Annie Fannie in Playboy" (emphasis mine). Dang. And they even say it "led to" Annie. Now it looks like I have to allocate space in the article to discuss "Goodman Goes Playboy" and write words saying that it was influential in the creation of the strip. Prhartcom ( talk) 22:41, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Goodman Beaver. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:30, 23 March 2017 (UTC)