Talk:The Shepherd King

The Shepherd King was a Media and drama good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 14, 2019	Good article nominee	Not listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on March 30, 2019.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the 1923 film The Shepherd King about the Biblical David has an opening scene in Egypt because of King Tut?

Film: Silent / American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Silent films task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Shepherd King/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Skyes(BYU) (talk · contribs) 20:03, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am very interested in pages about old films, directors, and actors. I am happy to review this article and learn about this biblical epic! Feel free to contact me with any questions; I am active on Wikipedia on the weekdays and very responsive to contacts and queries.Skyes(BYU) (talk) 20:03, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, I have finished with the majority of my review. I was impressed with the quality of prose and I found no issues with copyright or neutrality. Below, I have my only concerns. I am happy to finish up the review when those are taken care of. Skyes(BYU) (talk) 21:55, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Overall review checklist[edit]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

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.
a (reference section): 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Detailed points of concern[edit]

The news articles "Wright Lorimer sues Brady" and "Despondent actor a suicide by gas" only link to the Newspapers.com homepage and it would be much more helpful to readers if they linked to the direct articles.Skyes(BYU) (talk) 20:56, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The L.A Daily Mirror "Henry Armetta" source doesn't seem to be the most reliable since it seems to be a blog post and doesn't cite any sources. Is there another source available?Skyes(BYU) (talk) 21:06, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The sentence below the cast list is a bit strange there by itself, perhaps it can be merged into the cast list and the information about the credit name and relationship to the director can be put in a footnote. Additionally, both sources cited refer to him as "Gordon" and do not mention the name "Jack" in reference to the son as far as I can tell. Skyes(BYU) (talk) 21:15, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Point one is addressed. The other two I can try to handle, though wanted to give a heads up that the article writer/nom hasn't edited in months, so if it's something that i don't have access to then I unfortunately won't be of help. Wizardman 15:08, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What I'm gonna do on this one is close this as a "fail without prejudice". Basically just meaning that should the writer return we can just reopen this review without having to wait a year for another GA review, since the article's not far from passage. Wizardman 13:56, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]