Talk:Film career of Audie Murphy/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Chris troutman (talk · contribs) 00:56, 30 December 2013 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria[reply]

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section:
None of the text about the Willinghams is supported by the citation in Graham. Chris Troutman (talk) 05:54, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Graham citation was only meant to support the sentence about the friendship with the Willinghams, and as I'm looking at the book right now, p. 235 states "Audie continued to keep company with friends he'd formed in the late forties: Spec McClure, Willard Willingham, Perry Pitt and his family." However, as I think you might have been looking for more verification on the rest of the paragraph, I have added more references, some of which also include Mary Willingham. Please advise if you need more on this. — Maile (talk) 15:11, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
This is a complete filmography and it took me quite a while to go through the citations. There are many instances where actors/actresses are listed in the chart as acting in a movie (supported by Imdb) although the source does not mention them. The sourcing guideline does not per se require citations for non-controversial intuitive statements, which is why this passes. I would suggest adding those other citations prior to an A-level or FA review so that this article is tight as a drum and any stealth vandalism that creeps in is eliminated. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:30, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for the review and for the advice. — Maile (talk) 22:36, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just a post script for the record. Today I took care of adding the extra citations for the cast listings. — Maile (talk) 00:23, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I see some spurious cast names have been removed, too. I really appreciate your efforts to tighten that sourcing. Chris Troutman (talk) 02:17, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]