Talk:Zombie Nightmare/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Some Dude From North Carolina (talk · contribs) 16:45, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Hey, I'm going to be reviewing this article. Expect comments by the end of the week. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 16:45, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Infobox and lead

• Add a "Use ___ dates" template to fix references.
  • Done. GamerPro64 21:52, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

With this template you added, try to be consistent with it in #Mystery_Science_Theater_3000.

Done. GamerPro64 02:47, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

• Non-free use rationale for the poster looks good.
• Couldn't find any current issues with the infobox.
• However, the runtime does need a source.
  • I have never been asked to source a run time before. GamerPro64 21:52, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Most good articles have sources for the runtime for verifcation.

There are some Featured articles that don't have a sourced runtime. Some of mine don't either. GamerPro64 02:16, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Most featured articles listed have a source for the runtime while the ones that don't, such as this and this, were promoted decades ago and might not be up to today's standards (some have very short leads, so they might have to reassessed). Is there a reason a source can't be added?

Because its not a requirement for Good Articles. You yourself have a film nominated with no sourced run time with Jojo Rabbit. GamerPro64 03:05, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Could that be because it's sourced in the body of the article? Nothing for this review is a "requirement" for the GA process and I don't get why there's such a big fuss about verifying your statement. The second criteria for GA-articles is literally that all content should be "Verifiable with no original research", so I'm not sure how you're other articles have passed without that verification. As the runtime isn't sourced, it's original research.

I brought this up at the Film WikiProject. GamerPro64 15:44, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

There seems to be a mixed consensus in the discussion so far but I added a source in anyway. GamerPro64 00:51, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@GamerPro64: There's only one unaddressed comment above. After that, I'll recheck the article. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 01:32, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@GamerPro64: Actually, there are now two comments, one in this section below and one in #Release. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 12:15, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@GamerPro64: With the help of Chompy Ace, all that's left is to archive sources for future reference. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 01:12, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

• Done. GamerPro64 01:34, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

• Additionally, add a caption to the image.
  • Added caption. GamerPro64 21:52, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Change it to "Promotional release poster" for consistency with other articles.

 Done Chompy Ace 00:17, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

• In the first sentence, shouldn't "stars" be "starring"?
  • changed. GamerPro64 21:52, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
• Add a serial comma after the first mention of Tia Carrere.
  • Done. GamerPro64 21:52, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
• The transition between the premise and production seems off. Maybe change the sentence starting with "Shot in" by making it start with "The film was shot in".
  • Reworked. GamerPro64 21:52, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
• Everything else in the lead seems fine.

Plot and cast

• The plot section is under 700 words so that passes WP:FILMPLOT.
• Remove the comma after "by the zombie".
  • Done. GamerPro64 21:52, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
• Cast section looks good.

Production

• There should probably be more subsections for readers going through the table of contents.
  • Not really sure there's enough info to actually relegate things to their own sections beyond the music. GamerPro64 21:52, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
• To the image, add "|upright|" per MOS:UPRIGHT.
  • Never knew that. Looks much better. GamerPro64 21:52, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
• "home town" → "hometown"
  • Done. GamerPro64 21:52, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
• "white sounding" → "white-sounding" (both uses)
  • Done. GamerPro64 21:52, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
• The sentence "It was the film debut of American actress Tia Carrere." seems out of place. Maybe merge it with the first sentence in the second paragraph as "Zombie Nightmare was produced by Montreal-based company Gold-Gems Productions and was the film debut of American actress Tia Carrere."
  • Gave it a shot. GamerPro64 21:52, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
• "Childhood friend" → "A childhood friend"
  • Done. GamerPro64 21:52, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
• "casted" isn't a word so change it uses to simply cast.
  • Changed. GamerPro64 21:52, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
• Starting a sentence with "Direction under" doesn't sound right; try rewording.
  • Reworded. GamerPro64 21:52, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
• "the films editor" → "the film's editor"
  • Done. GamerPro64 21:52, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
• "then wife" → "then-wife"
  • Done. GamerPro64 21:52, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
• "back up" → "backup"
  • Done. GamerPro64 21:52, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Release and legacy

• Remove the dependence on quotes with the help of WP:RECEPTION.
  • I changed up one sentence for the first sentence, shrinking its quote. GamerPro64 21:52, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
• "Reception to Zombie Nightmare were generally negative." → "Reception to Zombie Nightmare was generally negative." or "Reviews to Zombie Nightmare were generally negative."
  • Changed. GamerPro64 21:52, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
• "of which" → "which"
  • Done.
• "Worldwide, The film" → "Worldwide, the film"

 Done Chompy Ace 00:17, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

References

• Archive sources (either manually or with a tool).
• Add codes to ProQuest by adding this template to references.
  • I tried doing that and it broke the references. GamerPro64 21:52, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Live-In uses the template by removing "|via=" and adding the template (with a space) after all the "cite web" parameters: <ref>{{cite web|...}} {{ProQuest|...}}</ref>

I added them in. GamerPro64 00:51, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Progress

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: 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):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·