Talk:Brave (Jurassic World Camp Cretaceous)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Brave (Jurassic World Camp Cretaceous)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Bilorv (talk · contribs) 03:02, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Notability is not part of the GA criteria so I will not be assessing it.

• "Shortly after falling off the monorail train after failing" – Two consecutive "after"s are undesirable.

 Fixed Chompy Ace 13:06, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

• "that Ben has encountered previously and had been injured by his friends a few days prior" – Not sure about the grammar in the second half, would it be "that Ben has encountered previously, having been injured by his friends a few days prior"? Or is a different meaning intended?

 Done Chompy Ace 13:07, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

• "eventually yells at Bumpy" – Time period implied here is "several days later" so "eventually" can be dropped.

 Done Chompy Ace 13:06, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

• "and Tiff (Stephanie Beatriz). a trio of hunters" – Should be a period, I think, but then the sentence has quite a few clauses so might benefit from being split in two.

 Fixed Chompy Ace 13:06, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

• "In separate interviews" – Not sure the emphasis of "separate" is really needed (not exactly a coincidence that someone says the same thing twice when asked the same question, though good that it's true so we know it's not an "off the top of my head" that's not quite accurate).

 Done Removed. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 14:08, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

• "a character that was presumably killed in the first season's finale" – Who's doing the presumption here? Is this the audience assuming they were dead, or the writers thinking they'd leave him dead?

 Fixed Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 14:08, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

• "The choice of developing the character in a single episode" (in the caption) – This made it sound to me like Ben appears in this episode and no other episodes. As it is I'm not too sure–he appeared in season one but this is his only season two appearance? Can you find a way to reword this?

 Done Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 14:08, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

• "We put a lot of love into that one" (in the blockquote) – maybe replace "that one" with "['Brave']" per MOS:PMC as the context is unclear otherwise.

 Done Chompy Ace 13:11, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

• "Ben's character development throughout the episode was" – In what way does the character develop? Not too clear from the plot events alone.

 Fixed Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 14:08, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

• "Following its announcement" – What does this mean? All releases follow announcement (unless they occur simultaneously, I guess).

 Done Removed. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 14:08, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

• "However, on the other side of the spectrum" – Too wordy. "However" or "On the other hand" would suffice.

 Done Removed. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 14:08, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

• I don't think you can say ComicBook.com is a review or use it in Reception as it's primarily an interview, which doesn't have the same editorial independence as reviews and so the praise is not that meaningful. For instance, I don't think I've ever seen an interview which says "this episode/season/work was pointless", whereas I've seen that as an opinion in reviews. They don't have the same freedom to dissent.

 Done Removed. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 14:08, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

• All these website names should be in italics, both in the refs and in prose, I'm pretty sure. The idea is that the article may not use italics if it's referring to the company/platform, but when saying the name as the publication originated information, we use italics.

 Done Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 14:08, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

• Some editors do not like the use of screenshots from episodes as infobox images, but I believe the fair use rationale fully meets the NFCCP so I'm happy with it.

Think that's all to be said but will revisit after these are addressed to see if there's anything more. — Bilorv (talk) 03:02, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

@Bilorv: All your suggestions have been addressed. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 14:08, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

All issues have indeed been fixed. A search for more sources doesn't turn up anything, so I'm satisfied with broadness (and focus—detail given to the show more generally is enough for context but not too much). No stability or neutrality concerns, addressed image usage above. Prose is good now. I've checked most of the sources and can't find any verifiability issues; no copyvio. So that's a pass for GA. Thanks to both of you for the quick responses. — Bilorv (talk) 14:42, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I know this is a good article and this might sound controversial, but there’s no reason to make an article just for a single episode. What is this, Fandom? Why just one? Why? --Inaturlist Lover (talk) 12:28, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Notable?

Okay, less brute force this time. I'm going to have to agree with User:Inaturlist Lover above. I don't see that much that sets it apart from other episodes; WP:NOTFANDOM. @Toughpigs: What do you think? 2605:B40:13E7:F600:5C3E:C3DA:FDE9:A738 (talk) 01:29, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

(Without just blindly saying "It's already GA") 2605:B40:13E7:F600:5C3E:C3DA:FDE9:A738 (talk) 01:33, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

The definition of notability is that the topic "has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." This article has that coverage, as seen in the many references at the bottom of the page. That's why it has Good Article status. Your personal opinion does not overrule the consensus arrived at by other editors. Toughpigs (talk) 01:51, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Alright, I'll leave it alone. What I'm trying to say is that this pretty much has the same amount of coverage as other episodes as far as I can tell. 2605:B40:13E7:F600:5C3E:C3DA:FDE9:A738 (talk) 02:07, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

That is a reason to create articles for other episodes, not to penalize the article that exists. The basic fact is that this topic has significant coverage in reliable sources, therefore this topic is notable. Toughpigs (talk) 03:19, 17 June 2024 (UTC)