Talk:Empty Orchestra/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:47, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Given I have begun reading this for DYK I will continue here. Queries to be jotted below:

"~~Empty Orchestra" follows a relatively simply narrative of co-workers on a night out~~ ~~..."simple"..?~~

Yes, fixed; thanks! Josh Milburn (talk) 21:33, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

~~I'm not sold on the capitalised Deaf I must say, but am not familiar with current terminology so am happy to defer on this...~~

I wouldn't have capitalised it normally, but I'm following Howlett's own terminology. I think it's generally good practice (and this is enshrined in at least a few policies/guidelines on Wikipedia) to respect people's own ascriptions of self-identity. I suspect she has favoured it because she wants to say that she is Deaf, rather than just being deaf. So, from our article on Deaf culture: "When used as a cultural label especially within the culture, the word deaf is often written with a capital D and referred to as "big D Deaf" in speech and sign. When used as a label for the audiological condition, it is written with a lower case d." Josh Milburn (talk) 21:33, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point - I've learnt something today :) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:22, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pemberton drew inspiration from the way viewers "sensed those characters were having fun at these musical events". - f this could be written without paraphrasing and quotes that's be good as not memorable or distinctive. The article has a lot of quotes, but most add something when relayed verbatim.

Rephrased. I appreciate I use a lot of quotes in these articles; something to work on! Josh Milburn (talk) 21:33, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise, nout to complain about. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:00, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to have a look! Josh Milburn (talk) 21:33, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1. Well written?:

Prose quality:

Manual of Style compliance:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:

References to sources:

Citations to reliable sources, where required:

No original research:

3. Broad in coverage?:

Major aspects:

Focused:

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:

Fair representation without bias:

5. Reasonably stable?

No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:

Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

Overall:

Pass or Fail:

- a nice read Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:22, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]