GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: OnePt618 ( talk · contribs) 06:14, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
The article is unquestionably well-written. The prose flows naturally, and it makes for interesting reading about why the character is important in the Disney pantheon. All claims are well-cited. It is properly sectioned. There is a lack of puffery, restricting praise to only quotes and comments from third-party sources. There are no contentious labels, unsupported attributions, expressions of doubt, or editorializing.
The one area where this article falls down is the "Synonyms for said" sub-criteria. (See WP:SAID.) Several dangerous words are used here, for example:
More minor nitpicks:
The References section is a treasure trove. All references seem to be valid and from reliable sources.
Copyright violator tool reports that the only copied words come from quotes, so no problem there.
The article explores not only the character's origins, but the impact on society and on feminism as well.
The article is overall neutral. Change the troublesome words as spelled out in Criteria 1 and you're all set.
No indication of a recent edit war or content dispute in the article history.
The three images are fine, and they are properly license-tagged. I couldn't find any additional free images in a web search that added significantly to the article, aside from a few cosplay photos which wouldn't add anything material.
The existing images have great captions.
This article is almost there. The troublesome words in Criteria 1 need addressing -- these should be pretty quick and relatively easy fixes. I believe the article qualifies for Good Article status once these issues are resolved. For now, I am placing the nomination on Hold.
Changedforbetter: Thank you for all the timely fixes! I've promoted the article to Good Article criteria. Congratulations!! -- φ OnePt618 Talk φ 04:12, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: OnePt618 ( talk · contribs) 06:14, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
The article is unquestionably well-written. The prose flows naturally, and it makes for interesting reading about why the character is important in the Disney pantheon. All claims are well-cited. It is properly sectioned. There is a lack of puffery, restricting praise to only quotes and comments from third-party sources. There are no contentious labels, unsupported attributions, expressions of doubt, or editorializing.
The one area where this article falls down is the "Synonyms for said" sub-criteria. (See WP:SAID.) Several dangerous words are used here, for example:
More minor nitpicks:
The References section is a treasure trove. All references seem to be valid and from reliable sources.
Copyright violator tool reports that the only copied words come from quotes, so no problem there.
The article explores not only the character's origins, but the impact on society and on feminism as well.
The article is overall neutral. Change the troublesome words as spelled out in Criteria 1 and you're all set.
No indication of a recent edit war or content dispute in the article history.
The three images are fine, and they are properly license-tagged. I couldn't find any additional free images in a web search that added significantly to the article, aside from a few cosplay photos which wouldn't add anything material.
The existing images have great captions.
This article is almost there. The troublesome words in Criteria 1 need addressing -- these should be pretty quick and relatively easy fixes. I believe the article qualifies for Good Article status once these issues are resolved. For now, I am placing the nomination on Hold.
Changedforbetter: Thank you for all the timely fixes! I've promoted the article to Good Article criteria. Congratulations!! -- φ OnePt618 Talk φ 04:12, 16 February 2020 (UTC)