Talk:Allied (film)/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: Juliette Han (talk · contribs) 07:51, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Soon. Juliette Han (talk) 07:51, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Lead

• 'began developing the story after hearing the story' → 'Knight developed the script from the story told to him as a 21 year old man' / 'Knight first began developing the script'
• 'and would also film in the Canary Islands', 'and would match the designs' → e.g. 'and continued in May 2016 in the Canary Islands'
• 'it would receive a nomination' (see previous point) → 'it earned / received a nomination'

 Done all. Rusted AutoParts 15:50, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Costume design

• Copyright issue: direct quotation of Johnston is excessive. It doesn’t appear that it is something inevitable for this section, specifically that the same ideas could not be described without copying 8 sentences in a row. The ‘Johnston stated […] she puts herself together’ part should be either shortened, or partially reworded into a paraphrase

I tinkered with that paragraph, and this is where I got it to. Would this work?: Johnston shaped the style of the costumes around the characters, and particular focus was on Marianne. Johnston talk of how she felt you never get to the hear of the character, and had two different styles for her. "“I wanted her to look very assured in the first part of the film, in Casablanca. I looked at a lot of French style and fashion plates from the time, and I made her look very clean and graphic. When she goes to London, she takes on a mantle of being a mother and wife, so I put her in warmer tones. Rusted AutoParts 16:02, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

@Rusted AutoParts: How about this version: Johnston shaped the style of the costumes around the characters, and particular focus was on Marianne, whose clothing altered with the development of the plot. "I wanted her to look very assured in the first part of the film, in Casablanca.", said Johnston, "I looked at a lot of French style and fashion plates from the time, and I made her look very clean and graphic. When she goes to London, she takes on a mantle of being a mother and wife, so I put her in warmer tones. But you never really know who she is." Johnston-Johnston repetition at the beginning of the sentence is avoided due to the interrupted quotation, and also 'one never gets to know Marianne' point is saved (it logically ends the quotation), while the 'heart'-sentence (which basically states the same) is removed. Juliette Han (talk) 17:32, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Perfect, I put that version in. Rusted AutoParts 17:35, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

• Are there any images to illustrate these outfits? This section describes costumes in detail, and considering that this film has relevant accolades, an illustration may be useful

There aren’t specific images of the costumes unfortunately (as far as I know anyway). I did include an image of Lauren Bacall as a means to highlight how her attire had influenced the designers approach to the film, but it got yanked by another editor as being superfluous. Rusted AutoParts 15:47, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Critical response

• Copyright issue: shortening quotes from The Playlist and The New York Observer is needed. For instance, ‘If you love classic movies and their potential to sweep you up into a world outside of your own experience, this one will rock your world.’ may be for sure removed without affecting meaning of the opinion
• Rephrasing other unreasonably long quotes is also desirable (CinemaBlend, The Guardian, Deadline (see))
• write/writing → the review reads, critics praise, thought, etc.

I believe I have tackled all these points. Many of the quote blocks I decided to rework, as for certain quotes they didn't really say much (IE Deadline). Rusted AutoParts 16:29, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Outcome

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those 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—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   UPD: Passed. Juliette Han (talk) 18:11, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

@Juliette Han: I have addressed all points raised. Rusted AutoParts 16:29, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

@Rusted AutoParts: Congratulations on passing this! Juliette Han (talk) 18:02, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the review, Juliette. Most appreciated. Rusted AutoParts 18:17, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.