Talk:Batman & Robin (film)/GA3
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Hi! I'll be reviewing this article over the next few days. My initial impression is positive, but I'll need to read the whole article before passing or failing it. -Drilnoth (talk) 15:00, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
- I've started reviewing it and have noticed a few issues with the plot summary:
- The sentence, "That night, a charity event is held by Wayne Enterprises with special guests, Batman and Robin and she decides to use her abilities to seduce Batman and Robin." really needs some work.
- Although the first paragraph of description is fine, paragraphs 2 and 3 sound really choppy; there's a lot of short sentences that sound kind of stilted. Rewriting those paragraphs, or just finding places were sentences could be combined, would be great.
- -Drilnoth (talk) 15:14, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
- The following quotation in the "Cast" section has a reference, but the quotation itself is not actually located at the referenced website article: "Schumacher cast Clooney in the role because he felt the actor "could step away from a more brooding, self-centered Batman, like Michael Keaton or Val Kilmer, and be more more, accessible and fun."". After reading through the cited source, the quotation looks like it might actually be paraphrasing, so it should be rewritten a bit. -Drilnoth (talk) 15:23, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
- I've finished my review and have put the article on hold for the improvement discussed above. -Drilnoth (talk) 15:45, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
- The following quotation in the "Cast" section has a reference, but the quotation itself is not actually located at the referenced website article: "Schumacher cast Clooney in the role because he felt the actor "could step away from a more brooding, self-centered Batman, like Michael Keaton or Val Kilmer, and be more more, accessible and fun."". After reading through the cited source, the quotation looks like it might actually be paraphrasing, so it should be rewritten a bit. -Drilnoth (talk) 15:23, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Review
[edit]GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- The plot summary could still use a little work in this regard.
- 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 few more images would be nice, but they aren't needed for GA.
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Good work!
- Pass or Fail:
