Talk:Thor: Ragnarok/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ssven2 (talk · contribs) 09:02, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

I will review this article. Thank you.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 09:02, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

General

• Write the years for Thor, Thor: The Dark World, GOTG, Big Trouble in Little China, Earth Girls Are Easy, The Avengers, Age of Ultron, Infinity War and its sequel, Terminator 2: Judgment Day, Doctor Strange, Hunt for the Wilderpeople, Spider-Man: Homecoming, Captain America: The Winter Soldier, 48 Hrs., Withnail and I, Planes, Trains and Automobiles, Flash Gordon, Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire and Star Wars (on their first mention only).
  •  Done

Lede

• "It is the sequel to 2011's Thor and 2013's Thor: The Dark World, and is the seventeenth film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU)." — Remove the second "is" after "and" and "the".
  •  Not done per this talk page discussion.
• "The rest of the cast, including Blanchett as Hela, was confirmed in May 2016" — Shouldn't it be "were" instead if "was"?
  • "Cast" is a singular collective noun in this instance so was is correct.
• "The film received highly positive reviews, with many critics declaring it the best film of the Thor trilogy and praising Waititi's direction, the cast's performances, action sequences, soundtrack, and humor." — Write it as "The film received highly positive reviews, with many critics declaring it the best of the Thor trilogy; praise was directed towards Waititi's direction, the cast's performances, action sequences, soundtrack, and humor." You've already mentioned it being a film at the start of the sentence, so no need a second time.
  • Removed "film" but did not add in semi-colon or slight reword there to avoided "directed" right before "direction".

Plot

• Just a suggestion, not necessary to resolve this: You can make a note on how the film incorporates footage from Doctor Strange in here. As I said, not necessary to resolve this. Your call.
  • The footage is not from Doctor Strange. As you will see when you get to the production section, that footage was filmed by Waititi for this film.
• "Hela arrives in Asgard, destroying its army and killing the Warriors Three; resurrects the ancient dead who once fought with her, including her giant wolf Fenris; and appoints the Asgardian Skurge as her executioner." — Can do with some rephrasing, like "Hela arrives in Asgard, destroys its army while also killing the Warriors Three, resurrects the ancient dead who once fought with her including her giant wolf Fenris, and appoints the Asgardian Skurge as her executioner."
  • Reworded.
• Wikilink wormholes and gladiator for those who might not be aware of the terms at first.
  •  Done

Cast

• "The decision to make Hela related to Thor, as opposed to Loki as in the comics and Norse mythology," — Better to remove the second instance of "as". Just "The decision to make Hela related to Thor, as opposed to Loki in the comics and Norse mythology" will do.
  •  Done

Favre1fan93, TriiipleThreat and Adamstom.97, I'll look at the rest tomorrow.....

@Ssven2: Replied above. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:33, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Production

• "Waititi consulted with theoretical physicist Clifford Johnson, who previously consulted on the second season of Agent Carter, on space travel." — Can be rephrased as "Waititi consulted with theoretical physicist Clifford Johnson, who had previously consulted on the second season of Agent Carter, on space travel." Can you try some other word besides consulted to avoid repetition of the term at close proximity? Also wikilink "space travel" like wormholes and gladiator above.
  • I've rearranged the info. I don't think we can avoid saying "consultant" twice, but I've moved the content further away, so it should help.
• " and Chris Hemsworth suggested that Matt Damon, who Hemsworth knows, take on the role" — You can simply say, "whom he knew personally/professionally" instead. It should be "knew" as the casting of Damon has already taken place by now (past tense).
  • Fixed.

Release

• " Sandy Schaefer of Screen Rant felt it" — Wikilink Screen Rant here and in all references that are from the website.
  • Linked.

Nothing much in the subsequent sections. As for the sources, do replace the capitalised words with just the starting letter being capitalised and the rest in small letters (eg: SPOILER in ref no 7, "SPIDER-MAN, THOR 3" in ref no 59, The entire title in ref no 116 and TODAY in ref no 142). Italicise TheWRAP in ref no 203, De-italicise Washington D.C. Area Film Critics Association in ref no 214. Add the publisher name in ref no 219 and link the "publisher/work" portions in ref nos 220 and 221 (THR (Should be The Hollywood Reporter instead of just Hollywood Reporter and Variety).

All adjusted.

Favre1fan93, TriiipleThreat and Adamstom.97, resolve these comments and the article will be promoted.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 11:32, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

@Ssven2: I've answered the last bits. I've also restored a bit of your editing (mainly the part in the release section about the old date) because that is good to mention in that section, even though it is stated earlier. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 13:58, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

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

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

7. Overall: Passed, my queries were met and solved by the nominator.

   Pass or Fail:

Thank you for addressing my comments, Favre1fan93, TriiipleThreat and Adamstom.97. Congratulations, the article has passed.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 15:47, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Ssven! - adamstom97 (talk) 19:57, 8 April 2018 (UTC)