Talk:James T. Kirk/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû 07:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

This review is ongoing. GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

   See issues listed below review.

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   See issues listed below review.

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

   See issues listed below review.

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   File:JamesTKirk.jpg and File:Chris pine kirk.jpg have a mis-match between the image description ("this is a publicity photo") and license ("this is a screen shot").

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   On hold. --Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû 08:45, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Referencing issues

1. The lead section should summarize key points of the article, not introduce new information. There should be no citations in the lead, because the actual information later on in the article should be referenced.
2. Sequential sentences using the same reference should be consolidated. Ex. "Although born on Earth, Kirk for a time lived on Tarsus IV, where he was one of nine surviving witnesses to the massacre of 4,000 colonists by Kodos the Executioner (Arnold Moss).[1] James Kirk's brother, Sam, and his sister-in-law are introduced and killed in "Operation: Annihilate!", leaving behind three children.[1]" The reference here should only follow the last sentence.
3. Consider using shortened footnotes to consolidate common sources.

Tone

There are parts of this article that meander in-and-out of in-universe style. "Depiction" presents what boils down to a character biography, which should be avoided according to the Manual of Style for writing about fiction.

Related MOS, policies, guidelines:

• Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction)
  • WP:INUNIVERSE
  • WP:PASI

Consider:

• Khan Noonien Singh, a featured article

Suggestions Consider writing something along the lines of: "The original Star Trek series featured a young, brash Captain ... (some characteristics, features) ...." The character analysis (Jewett, Lawrence; Erdman, Block) is great. How Shatner evolved the role of Kirk throughout the course of the series, his aspirations for the role, depictions in the films, and so forth should be in this section. The parts of "Development" that are about character development as the show evolved, should go in depiction, because it explains how the depiction of Kirk changed. (Development and design of the character, how Roddenberry decided to make him different from Pike, and that sort of thing should stay in the Development section.)

In-universe biographical style and events are heavily frowned upon unless sources show that their occurance effected Shatner/Pine's depiction of Kirk. For example, if there is a source that claims/explains/shows how Sam Kirk's death resulted in Shatner changing his acting to show a mourning Kirk, that can be mentioned. Otherwise Sam, or his death, or the massacre shouldn't be mentioned. Events which sources state show aspects of Kirk's character, such as his refusal to kill Kodos, can stay in that context.

-- Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû 08:45, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Overall

In general, ignoring the problems previously stated about in-universe biographies of fictional characters, this is a very well written article. The research, particularly into depiction and characterization, is excellent. Other than the WP:INUNIVERSE problems, the only other issues are minor -- MOS referencing, image description-license mismatches, &tc. -- and are easily fixed.

Also please note that my suggestions in the previous section are just that -- suggestions. I am placing this article on hold for the time being. The article has the potential to become a Good Article if a dedicated editor had the time to sit down and redevelop the "Depiction" section. The hold will remain for a week, at which point the article will either be Passed or Failed depending on changes made in the meantime.

Should you have any questions, comments, or suggestions, please leave a signed note in the section below titled "Response." Should any editor disagree with any of the above points and analysis to the extent that they wish for a second opinion, please request one in the response section below.

--Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû 08:45, 24 November 2009 (UTC)