Talk:Grounded (opera)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Unexpectedlydian (talk · contribs) 18:07, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'll be reviewing this article, it looks very interesting. Comments to follow shortly using the table below. Unexpectedlydian^♯4 talk^‽ 18:07, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Heavy Grasshopper, I have completed an initial review. I don't think there's much work required to get it to GA :) Do let me know if you have any questions! Unexpectedlydian^♯4 talk^‽ 15:16, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Unexpectedlydian Thanks for your thorough review. I think I have made most of the changes you thought would be helpful. I'm not sure what you had in mind regarding the image captions.

I don't think "Observor" and "Sensor" have anything helpful to link to. In the Broadway World review, Friscic does refer to the opera as a whole as ground-breaking, in the subtitle and the last line of the review. Heavy Grasshopper (talk) 16:55, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Heavy Grasshopper, thank you for addressing the changes and clarifying the points above. I have made a few minor adjustments to the article, including adding alt descriptions (descriptions of images which are accessible to people using screen-readers). Happy to pass the article as GA now, good job! :) Unexpectedlydian^♯4 talk^‽ 15:10, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks! Heavy Grasshopper (talk) 16:05, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	I've made a few minor changes throughout to spelling, and to make sure that quotations match the source text. Background ~~Wikilink F-16.~~ Synopsis ~~Wikilink Reaper drones, if there is an appropriate article.~~ ~~Wikilink the first instance of rancher (currently only the second instance is linked).~~ ~~Wikilink the first instance of Las Vegas (currently only the second instance is linked).~~ ~~Wikilink the first instance of drone.~~ ~~"is both an accomplished warrior..." What does "warrior" mean in this instance? Is it an Air Force term? If not, I'd suggest changing to a different word.~~ ~~Do "Observer" and "Sensor" have articles that can be linked to?~~ ~~No need to Wikilink "tedium", "adrenaline", "blackjack", or "dressing room".~~
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Lead Y Layout Y Words to watch Y Fiction Y List incorporation Y
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Sources are provided in the correct place. Citations provided throughout. Once any changes have been made to sources, review the source list so that the first instance of source publications are Wikilinked, and provide Wikilinks for The Guardian, Washington Post, Metro Weekly, Broadway World.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Source check General comments ~~There are two separate citations for "Washington National Opera Presents 'Grounded'", Kennedy Center. Can you combine the two?~~ ~~The hyperlink for the Broadway World citation does not link to the article.~~ Reliable source comments Washing Classical Review — I have checked the website and am content that the content are reliable, as the founder and editor is an established critic of classical music, and the website itself is part of a broader network of classical review outlets. Metro Weekly — A magazine based in Washington, content that it is relevant given the opera was at the Washington National Opera. Broadway World — An industry-specific leading publication, content that this is suitable for the article. Background ~~"in which the character is simply called Pilot." — I can't find which source backs this up.~~ I have moved around some citations within the text so that it is clearer which statement is backed up by which source. Hope this is ok. Synopsis "Washington National Opera Presents 'Grounded'", Kennedy Center does not mention that the pilot is imprisoned after intentionally crashing a drone, however as per MOS:PLOTSOURCE, that's fine as it doesn't explicitly require a citation. Performance history and reception "though he also wrote there was "nil chemistry" between her and her onstage husband Eric..." The phrase "nil chemistry" here is not a direct quote found in the article, the actual quote is "While the tenor Joseph Dennis is affable in the role, his chemistry with D’Angelo is nil." "His assesment of the opera overall was as "ground breaking"". I don't think this is necessary accurate - Friscic describes the set design and LED technology as groundbreaking, not the whole performance.
	2c. it contains no original research.	From reviewing sources, I am content that there has been no OR, apart from in relation to the plot summary which is acceptable.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	From reviewing sources, no copyvio or plagiarism has been identified. Copyvio brings up nothing of concern.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Article is quite short but covers the main aspects of the opera suitable for a GA: background, synopsis, critique,
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	The article stays on topic throughout.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	The content of the article is presented neutrally.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Majority of recent edits are by nominator. No evidence of instability or edit wars.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Images are tagged with copyright status.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Images are relevant and suitable. ~~Images require an alternative description.~~
	7. Overall assessment.