Talk:2001: A Space Odyssey/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Ashliveslove (talk · contribs) 13:07, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Started the review process, will comment back problems soon ASHU^IND 13:07, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

Found and corrected DAB link.

Problems[edit]

I see a rather long discussion regarding the "epic film" on the talk page with no particular outcome. Was this issue resolved or not?

It was well-resolved but the focus shifted to the article epic film which had a lot more problems with it then the reference to it here. The problem lies in the fact that "epic" is one of the most fluidly (perhaps even gaseously or nebulously) defined film genres out there, sometimes used with reference to content and other times with reference only to style. It was finally agreed upon to drop stating for a fact in the first sentence that it's an epic film and to compromise with stating much later "The film is frequently described as an "epic film", both for its length and scope, and for its affinity with classical epics." This statement is appropriately cited. There was one editor who for a while wanted to drop ALL reference to "epic" (although it is so described in the film's marketing and in some reviews), but I think the current version should satisfy most.--WickerGuy (talk) 23:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have marked dead links. Please remove or replace them. ASHU^IND 03:15, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. igordebraga ≠ 03:54, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Disambiguation page link or link to other articles of the same name, i.e 2001: A Space Odyssey are needed. ASHU^IND 04:39, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
1st para, add link to Jupiter. ASHU^IND 03:15, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
3rd para, remove link to dialogue. unnecessary link. ASHU^IND 03:15, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
5th para, It was nominated for four Academy Awards, and received one for visual effects. correct one for its visual effects. ASHU^IND 03:15, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. igordebraga ≠ 03:54, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Influence on technology and law: Remove the dead image like of NewsPAD.jpg. ASHU^IND 10:11, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. igordebraga ≠ 18:29, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is a bare URL in middle of the section The clip can be downloaded online at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQ8pQVDyaLo. As . Make it a here link. Replace the link with a text link. ASHU^IND 18:06, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. igordebraga ≠ 08:41, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We should not give external links in running text, and if the link is to a copyvio we should not link it at all. Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:03, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Removed. Anything else? igordebraga ≠ 22:45, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Same thing. External link to CORDIS archive. ASHU^IND 10:09, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done.

Depection of spacecraft: link to NASA. ASHU^IND 05:48, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]; Done.

Military nature of orbiting satellites: 3rd para, last line. In the film, a U.S. air force insignia, and flag insignias of China and Germany. Link the China and Germany with there respective Flag Articles. ASHU^IND 06:06, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]; Done. igordebraga ≠ 13:47, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccuracy: In this section citation, synthesis and unreliable source issues are tagged. ASHU^IND 14:20, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]; I've cut what was questionable. igordebraga ≠ 18:44, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Final Analysis[edit]

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
Not much concerns here. ASHU^IND 09:05, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
No such concerns here. Article has been searched thoroughly for such references. ASHU^IND 09:05, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
All such aspects have been covered. ASHU^IND 09:05, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
Fine here.
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):
All images are proper till the review date and well captioned. ASHU^IND 09:05, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Keep up the good quality of Article. Don't let it delisted.
Regards.
ASHU^IND 09:05, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]