Talk:The Hustler/GA1
Latest comment: 16 years ago by Ishi Gustaedr in topic GA Review
 | This non-existent page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
GA Review
edit- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- B. MoS compliance:
- A. Prose quality:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
The article is pretty good overall, but it needs some work. First off, try linking "American drama film" in the lead. Also, try putting the cast into a table, all GAs and Fas have this. Also, the poster NEEDS to have a better fair-use rationale, and it needs to have an actual, clickable link the POSTER on Moviegoods.com. Lastly, split the "Critical and popular reception" section into a "Distribution" and a "Reception" section, as stated at WP:FILM's style guidelines. I will give the article one week, and then I'll make my decision. Limetolime talk to me • look what I did! 14:07, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
- "American" and "drama film" now wikilinked. FU rationale for the poster updated. Not all GA and FA film articles have the cast in a table, see for example Casablanca (film), and I don't think the article would be improved aesthetically by inserting a table. I can split the distribution out into a separate section but it would be a single two-sentence paragraph. Please advise. Otto4711 (talk) 13:31, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
- I wikilinked the actors' names in Plot to comply with MoS (Plot should be able to stand alone). The section could stand being streamlined a bit, but I'm not the one to do it since it's been years since I've seen the film; there appears to be too much detail (not every twist and turn needs to be included). I would also suggest passive voice be minimized throughout the article to strengthen it (pun intended).
Jim Dunning | talk 18:24, 28 May 2008 (UTC)- I can't agree that the plot summary is too detailed. It doesn't document "every twist and turn" and in fact leaves out major sections of the film which advance Eddie and Sarah's relationship but not the overall plot. The plot section accounts for approximately 20% of the article, which is a reasonable percentage. Otto4711 (talk) 18:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
- The week is up; and the above problem and my "Cast" section concern was not fixed. Unfortunately, I have to fail the article. Limetolime talk to me • look what I did! 20:22, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- FWIW, I looked at the first 23 films in the featured articles list from 300 (film) to Jaws (film). Of those, only 2 had the cast list as a table. For the rest: 3 had a simple bullet list, 8 had a bullet list with long descriptions, 6 had cast listed in paragraph form, and 4 didn't really have a cast list. --Ishi Gustaedr (talk) 21:42, 30 May 2008 (UTC)