Talk:Catalysts (The Spectacular Spider-Man)/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 17:21, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
In the lead, "...and was based primarily on initial designs by Alex Ross for the character in Spider-Man" ---> "...and was based primarily on initial designs by Alex Ross for the character in the 2002 film Spider-Man". In the Plot, "Peter arrives at party as Spider-Man", is it just me or is a word missing? Same section, "...he's mysteriously disappeared" ---> "...he has mysteriously disappeared". In the Production section, "The basic structure was based on initial designs drawn by Alex Ross for the Goblin as he appeared in the 2001 film Spider-Man", the film was released in May 2002, not 2001.
Done The Flash ^{talk} 01:12, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Check.

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
In the lead and Plot, please link "dinner party" to its correspondence article. In Goldman's review, not everyone, who doesn't read comics, watch the TV shows, etc., are familiar with who the Joker is. I mean I know who he is, but how 'bout your non-superhero reader.
Done The Flash ^{talk} 01:12, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Check.
Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
Is "Sony Pictures Television" the publisher for Refs. 14 and 18?
Well, it was their press release, so I'm unsure if it should be in the author field or the work field... The Flash ^{talk} 01:12, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm, that's a good question. I guess leave it like that, unless you have plans to take it to FAC, it'll be a problem there.

B. 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):

C. It contains no original research:

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
File:Catalysts SSM.jpg needs a lower resolution.
Done The Flash ^{talk} 01:12, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Check.

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!

-- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 17:21, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review! The Flash ^{talk} 01:12, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Thank you to SuperFlash for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 17:02, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thanks again! The Flash ^{talk} 18:26, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]