Talk:Mufasa/GA1

GA Review

Passed. BigChrisKenney (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Nominator: Changedforbetter (talk · contribs) 16:35, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: BigChrisKenney (talk · contribs) 07:22, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Changedforbetter: I will be reviewing this article as part of the January 2025 Backlog Drive. BigChrisKenney (talk) 07:22, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Intro

Made an edit you may wish to review.

Role

Good!

Development

Added a link you may wish to review.

Reception

I agree about the excessive citations in the last paragraph. I recommend to stick to at most, the top five that are the most prominent.

Citations reduced.--Changedforbetter (talk) 14:36, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cultural impact

Death

Again with excessive citations, refer to previous comment.

Fixed by reducing citations.--Changedforbetter (talk) 02:05, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Initial Assesment

Overall, I think the article is well written. There are two things that I would like to see changed.

1. The amount of times that Mufasa's death is referenced to Bambi's mother. I feel like it is referenced too many times across the whole article and needs to only be mentioned once in the intro and once in the main article.

With the filmmakers themselves describing The Lion King as "Bambi in Africa", parallels between The Lion King and Bambi are inescapable, as are comparisons between the deaths of Mufasa and Bambi's mother on both the production and reception sides. I've retained references throughout the entire article, but reduced mentions of Bambi's name by about half.--Changedforbetter (talk) 02:12, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2. The amount of the article that deals with Mufasa's death. It seems like 1/3 - 1/2 of the article is in some way refering to his death. While the death scene was impactful in many ways and deserves to be written about, I am certain that it does not need to be mentioned in every single section of the article. There should be a balance between the rest of the content in the article and I would recommend cutting 30-50% of the current material dealing with his passing.

Made significant cuts to the prose discussing Mufasa's death, namely by cleaning up text, cutting some sources, and deleting the final paragraph in "Death" that was dedicated to the Good Morning America tweet and Cecil the Lion.--Changedforbetter (talk) 02:35, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hope the comments help! I will continue the review when some changes have been made. BigChrisKenney (talk) 08:02, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for starting the review. Sorry about the delay in response! Out of the blue, three of my GA nominated articles randomly got reviewed within a few days of each other so I've been working through them in order of nomination. I'll start addressing your comments today. Changedforbetter (talk) 12:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@BigChrisKenney Thanks for your patience! I've addressed all points; my changes to the text have reduced the article size from 155,853 bytes to about 150,133, mostly by editing down the death section. Awaiting further comments. Changedforbetter (talk) 02:48, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Final Assessment

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, as shown by a source spot-check.
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:

@Changedforbetter: Thank you for addressing my comments! While I personaly think that the word death (mentioned over 100 times in the article) and the topic is still used a bit too much, I also think that the alterations you have made to the article merits a GA as I understand the reasoning behind using that topic so much.

Congratulations on another GA! BigChrisKenney (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@BigChrisKenney: I think you forgot to mention the sources you checked? DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 07:57, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@DoctorWhoFan91: Indeed I did! That and images. My apologies. I have added those sections now. @Changedforbetter: Could you please review these added sections?

Images

All images used are fair use or under creative commons.

Sources

I checked roughly every 12. All were pertinent.

Using link-dispenser.toolforge.org, I checked all the 404 links and saw that they were archived.

8, 96, 134, 208 could use an archive link. BigChrisKenney (talk) 08:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.