Talk:Maui (Moana)/GA1

GA Review

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

Nominator: Fieryninja (talk · contribs) 19:41, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: SyntaxZombie (talk · contribs) 05:00, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am reviewing this article. It is my first GA review, so I will likely ask for help.

means in progress.

SyntaxZombie (talk)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

Overall this is a very well written article that covers a lot of ground.

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): I found no issues with pros, spelling, or grammar.

b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): See comments 1 and 2 below
It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
a (reference section):

b (inline citations to reliable sources): See comments 3 and 4 below. N.b. the Buzzfeed article cited is, in fact, from Buzzfeed News so it is considered reliable.

c (OR):

d (copyvio and plagiarism): See comment 5 below
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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): All four images are tagged. Three are free use, one is an appropriately-tagged non-free use image of the subject with corresponding rational.

b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Hi Fieryninja! You have nominated a very well-written and thorough article for GA status, thank you. There are a couple of minor issues that I would like to see addressed to be confident in passing this article:

Talk about future appearances (such as Moana 2) would benefit from WikiPedia:As_of. E.g. "The character is due to return in the sequel film Moana 2, which will premiere in 2024."→"The character is due to return in the sequel film Moana 2. As of February 2024^[update], Moana 2 was scheduled to premier in November 2024."
There is some inconsistency with the date format in the References section, consider using YMD (all-numeric) exclusively in that section.
longlongtimeago.com appears to be a personal blog and is considered unreliable per UGC.
The plot summary that appears in Appearences > Film > Moana (2016) cites an article from The Times of India which has some reliability issues. Per FILMPLOT and PLOTCITE I think it would be better to base this summary on the primary source (the film) rather than a publication of dubious reputation. The similar GA for Woody from Toy Story is a useful example in this case.
The sections Story concept and writing, Character design, and Depictionss of Maui maybe be over using quotations. A few of these quotations (e.g. Musker's described Maui's tattoos as "a walking billboard of all his exploits") are valuable, but most should be paraphrased instead (e.g. "'everywhere in the South Pacific'" could be easily substituted with "found in many cultures of the South Pacific").

Once again, thank you for your nomination, with a few changes I believe this article passes.

Hi SyntaxZombie firstly congratulations on your first GA review! It's very impressive work. I've worked through your comments as follows, but let me know if I have missed anything.

Added the as of template to lede.
Corrected the reference date formats.
Removed the personal blog longlongtimeago.com
Removed the references from the plot summary
Converted some of the quotations to prose where they weren't really needed. I've kept a few that I think are useful. Fieryninja (talk) 14:13, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Fieryninja, thanks for your changes! I think the quotations that you have left are useful, but "putting them in the middle of a sentence" doesn't really follow the encyclopedic style of Wikipedia. By contrast, Ceranthor suggests "any direct quotations should be immediately cited after they are introduced." (see below). I hope that makes sense, let me know if I should clarify or pick out the specific instances of this. SyntaxZombie (talk) 16:27, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I got some additional feedback from Ceranthor, a good article mentor who is helping me with this review. I will address that feedback here:

"Generally, my rule of thumb to avoid plagiarism is that any direct quotations should be immediately cited after they are introduced. The article has a few instances where this is not followed."

I agree. Although the nominator converted some unnecessary quotations to prose, many of the remaining quotations still stray from the encyclopedic writing style. This is the only remaining issue I am aware of and I will work with the nominator to fix this.

"Are the following sources reliable?: Eurogamer.net, Buzzfeed, ScreenCrush"

Eurogamer is considered a reliable source for video games over at WikiProject_Video_games/Sources. The source is used specifically in the context of Maui's appearance in a video game.
The Buzzfeed article cited comes from Buzzfeed News, a generally reliable source.
The Screencrush article is a review written by a professional film critic and is cited for that purpose only. Per MOS:FILMCRITICS this is acceptable.

ref 42 "Roger Ebert" → "RogerEbert.com" fixed persuant to be bold, WP:GAN/I#R3 #4
ref 30 avoid allcaps in references fixed persuant to be bold, WP:GAN/I#R3 #4
Inconsistant use of serial comma fixed persuant to be bold, WP:GAN/I#R3 #4

SyntaxZombie (talk) 16:27, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SyntaxZombie I have never come across the issue about quotations being in the middle of the sentence. I don't really understand what I need to do, could you explain please? Does the same reference need to be repeated immediately after the quote because we don't usually break the middle of a sentence with a citation. Fieryninja (talk) 18:12, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The suggestion, to clarify, would be that any new sentence with a direct quotation should be followed by a citation. For example, ScreenCrush writer Britt Hayes criticised the film for being "repetitive and slavish to rudimentary conflict" due to Moana and Maui bickering incessantly. She further described Maui as "narcissistic" and "an obnoxious character who lacks any semblance of humility". would have a citation added after incessantly. Personally, I think it might be better to just consolidate into one sentence or to cut down some of the quotations even further (perhaps the repetitive [...] conflict quote). This quote is also quite long and could probably be reduced to one shorter sentence: Ben Child writing for The Guardian thought that it was unsurprising that Disney had moved away from the mythological figure as his exploits seemed "more like the stuff of horror movies than a Disney children’s animation" and said that Disney's Maui appeared to be more powerful than obese and had a "remarkable sense of dexterity and elastic grace for such an enormous fellow". He also particularly enjoyed the way Maui's tattoos come "thrillingly" to life in hand-drawn 2D animation. Let me know if that is still unclear. ceranthor 02:18, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ceranthor I've eliminated some of the quotes in the reception and trimmed down some sentences. Fieryninja (talk) 13:13, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like there's no citation after this sentence: Musker described Maui's tattoos as a "a walking billboard of all his exploits" allowing him to recount his deeds simply by turning his body and showing his back. Also here: New Zealand politician Jenny Salesa shared an image on Facebook that described Disney's Maui as "half pig, half hippo" and commented "this negative stereotype of Maui is just not acceptable". And here: Producer Osnat Shurer responded by saying that the production team had spent five years working with Polynesian advisors to create a beautiful representation and that the film was produced "with love and respect". Just think it's good practice to directly attribute quotations to avoid any concerns of plagiarism. ceranthor 15:16, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ceranthor I've added repeated citations. Fieryninja (talk) 16:18, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SyntaxZombie Any chance of finishing this one off now? I've got another GA review coming up. Fieryninja (talk) 22:41, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fieryninja I've looked over the changes you made in response to Ceranthor and I now confident that this article meets the standards for Good Articles. Congratulations! SyntaxZombie (talk) 23:52, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SyntaxZombie Thanks for taking the time to review it. I hope you enjoy working on other GA reviews. Fieryninja (talk) 05:40, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]