Talk:Nick Stuart/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Cirt (talk · contribs) 02:15, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

I will review this article. I will do my best to get to at least the various parts of the review of the article within a time period of Seven Days... — Cirt (talk) 02:15, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Image review

1. File:NickStuartHeadshot.jpg = {{not done}} = good use of fair use rationale argumentation. However, perhaps some more research would turn up more free-use images. Also, it would be nice to at least know the circa time period of this photo.
2. File:NickStuartSueCarol1928.jpg = {{not done}} = please add date to date field. Also, could this one be moved to Wikimedia Commons ?
3. File:SueCarol-Baby.1932.jpg = Y = no issues here.

— Cirt (talk)

Request: Can you please take those responses, and respond instead, below my above comments? Thank you, — Cirt (talk) 04:53, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Regarding #1 above - I thought the infobox pix, as the "main image" could be fair use. Will endeavor to replace it with a true free-use image.  Done - have replaced fair use photo with pd photo. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:14, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Regarding #2 above - ::  Done - Onel5969 ^{TT me} 04:48, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Please note I added another photo (also pd). Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:14, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

 Done. Image review now passes here. Thank you! — Cirt (talk) 20:50, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Stability assessment

1. Upon inspection of article edit history = no issues here going back a few months.
2. Talk page shows absence of problems, as well.

Next, on to rest of review. — Cirt (talk) 02:30, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Good article nomination on hold

This article's Good Article nomination has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of October 11, 2015, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?:

1. NOTE: Please respond, below all the comments, and not interspersed throughout, thanks!
2. Please break up Career in film into perhaps two daughter sects to segment transitions of periods of time in his life.
3. Per WP:LEAD, please expand lede intro sect to fully function as a standalone summary of the entire article's contents.
4. Personal life and life after film = suggest place Personal life into the sect for Early life life and if you can't find more sourced info, have it be a few separate paragraphs in that sect called Early life and family.
5. Two (run-on) sentences on Early life. Please break out this info into a sect, Early life, and try to expand a bit more.
6. Final sect could be titled Later life and death.
7. Issues with long sentences and overuse of commas to try to string those sentences together. Please go through and improve conciseness, try splitting up long sentences when possible.

2. Verifiable?: Duly cited, throughout. But ... is this source something that passes our WP:RS standards?

3. Broad in coverage?:

1. Did he live with his parents after coming to USA?
2. Who were his parents? Siblings?
3. Why did he move to USA?
4. How did he get from Ohio to working in films?

4. Neutral point of view?: Presented in a matter of fact tone.

5. Stable? Passes here.

6. Images?: Passes here.

#NOTE: Please respond, below all the comments, and not interspersed throughout, thanks!

Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. Within 7 days, the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed by then, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far. — Cirt (talk) 04:10, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions. Will begin the work on it and ping you when I finish. Thanks again. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:20, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, thank you, just hold the updates till you're all done. :) — Cirt (talk) 19:34, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Okay, Cirt, think I have it done, at least as good as I can get it, based on reliable sources.

Regarding #1:

1. Career section broken up into appropriate subsections.
2. Lead re-written to better reflect a synopsis of the entire article, containing elements of all important aspects of the article.
3. Based on reliable sources, re-organized Early Life section. Could not find any more information regarding his early life. Most sources deal with contemporary times during his film career. A few sources deal with his early time in Hollywood, but I could find no sources to go into more depth regarding his childhood and adolescence.
4. Corrected run-ons. Nothing from reliable sources that I can expand.
5. Done, nice suggestion.
6. Think I've accomplished it. Went through, tightened and cleaned up.

Regarding #2:

1. Find a Grave is definitely not a reliable source. However, I thought that if it was for non-contentious issues, such as where they were buried, it could be used. If not, will strike the reference.

Regarding #3:

1. All of these questions must go unanswered with the available sourcing. I looked through about 8 years of early documents regarding Stuart, and none of these questions were answered.

Anyway, I appreciate your input. It's been invaluable, not only for this GA review, but for future ones as well. Look forward to your response. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 04:10, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Still suggest title that sect Early life and family instead of personal life. Try to break up lede intro sect to two paragraphs. That source should be okay because you're right it's for non-contentious info. After that, should be all set. — Cirt (talk) 04:14, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

I had meant to retitle that section. Overlooked it, fixed now. There was a natural break in the lead, so that is done now as well. Again, thanks. (will get to the other article over the next few days). Onel5969 ^{TT me} 04:50, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Passed as GA

Thanks for being so polite and responsive to my GA Review recommendations, — Cirt (talk) 05:06, 12 October 2015 (UTC)