Talk:Hellblazer/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: James26 (talk · contribs) 20:06, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

Comment: There are too many MoS issues here. The article needs another proper read-through by the nominator.

• I'm a bit confused about the titles of the story arcs, most of which are italicized, rather than in quotation marks. If these are the original titles that the stories had in the original comic, I believe they should be represented in quotation marks here.
• There are some missing italics for the comic title Swamp Thing (example: "It also contains a crossover issue with Swamp Thing,"), including in the lead. If some of these examples refer to the character Swamp Thing, that should be specified.
• Missing italics for Justice League Dark.

Missing punctuation is in bold.

• Missing commas (". . .and having to be responsible for killing an old friend, Gary Lester, and betraying another, called Zed, in the process.").
• Missing hyphen and awkward use of numeral instead of wording ("This was followed by an epic 9-issue story arc. . ."). I also don't think that "epic" is needed there, as mentioned below.
• Missing hyphen (". . .both filled in during a three-month break. . .")
• Missing hyphen (". . .echoing the real-life. . .")
• Missing comma (". . .coping with the murder of his father, Thomas, frames this story. . .")
• Missing italics ("Garth Ennis then took over the title in 1991, again from 2000 AD. . .")
• Missing italics (". . .which was the basis for the 2005 film Constantine. . .")
• Missing italics (". . .and eventually managed to gain stewardship of Hellblazer. . .")
• Missing hypen, italics, and use of period and comma together ("Following Azzarello's run, Mike Carey took over the title, following his Eisner award-winning title Lucifer, set in the Sandman universe,.")
• Missing italics, missing hyphen, and missing use of "the" ("Over [the] more than twenty years that it has been published, Hellblazer has normally been quite well-received.")
• Missing commas, missing quotation marks ("The next major arc, Fear and Loathing, (issues 62-67) takes you to the high point of John's personal life,"). Also, the use of "you" sounds far too casual.

• The article switches between "three" and "3" in the same sentence (". . .making him raise three children with her, in the guise of Kit Ryan, from Garth Ennis' time on the title, Zed, from Jamie Delano's, and Angie, from the current run, with 3 different artists. . .")
• The article switches between "Hell" and "hell".
• The article switches between "Demon" and "demon" (during the part about the British throne).
• The article switches between "2000AD" (improper title) and "2000 AD".

• Swamp Thing is over-linked.

• The article could specify the roles of certain staff members, so the reader doesn't have to click on their link to learn what they do. ("Following Azzarello's run, [writer] Mike Carey took over the title. . .")
• ". . .to the low point, through his dealings with the National Front, their threats towards Kit, and her leaving him to return to Ireland."

This really should be the beginning of a separate sentence IMO. The original runs a bit too long. It should also be re-worded (example: "A low point of John's life begins. . .")

• "There then follows a small break. . ."

This should be rewritten IMO, particularly the first two words.

• ". . .where Constantine is forced to purge himself of his darker side into another body. . ."

The part about another body could be rewritten. (Example: ". . .where Constantine is forced to purge himself of his darker side, which is placed into another body. . .")

• "Carey's run drew to a close with his three children attempting to kill all of John's family and friends. . ."

This sounds like a reference to children of Carey, the writer.

• The comic term "Annual" ("During his run, there was also an annual,") could be given a tad more explanation for non-regular readers ("a stand-alone issue", etc).

• The source cited in "Reception" does not verify the quote at the end. Also, the person should be identified, rather than being labeled "one writer." This needs to be removed or cited. For now, this keeps it from passing the "Verifiable" evaluation below.
• This reference is used twice, without the "ref name" style.

• The lists of "numerous artists" and "appearances in other comics" are too long IMO. I think four or five should be the maximum. The length of creator names is likely off-putting to a casual reader, and the character's appearances can be given more detail in his article.

1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

2. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

3. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

Comments such as "epic" and "very effective" could be removed.

1. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

2. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

3. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Hi James. Thank you so much for taking the time to look through this. I find the fact that you call yourself 'semi retired' laughable, given the amount of kind work you've put in on this page!

I've gone through your suggestions, and tried to tweak a few more errors I had noticed, with a couple of exceptions.

*"There then follows a small break. . ." I con't find this phrase for the life of me!

There was a second, but it turned out I was mistaken!

Please let me know if there is anything I've missed! Or any other issues!

Thanks again! Benny Digital ^{Speak Your Brains} 11:20, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I made a few minor contributions, as permitted. I think you've done a good job with this article (and especially the improvements), though you may still want to look out for issues with punctuation down the line. Anyway, I still think you should edit the part about Gaiman's work being a "very effective ghost story", as this sounds like an NPOV issue. -- James26 (talk) 19:00, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello again! I've edited that last bit, and now...well I'm not sure! This is my first attempt at this, and I'm not sure what happens next... Benny Digital ^{Speak Your Brains} 07:52, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Nice job. Short on time now, but I'll get back to this soon. -- James26 (talk) 19:33, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Completed. -- James26 (talk) 05:23, 11 October 2011 (UTC)