Talk:Chloe Sullivan/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of 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 copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

This is a very good article, but it needs copy-editing before it can attain GA status. These are issues from the lead alone:

"She has been a series regular since the pilot episode, being portrayed continuously by Allison Mack, with two other actresses having portrayed Chloe Sullivan as a child." Ungrammatical, split this into two sentences.
"The character was created just for Smallville, by series developers Alfred Gough and Miles Millar."-->The character was created exclusively for Smallville by series developers Alfred Gough and Miles Millar.
"In Smallville, Chloe is the editor of the high school newspaper, The Torch, who notices that the meteor rocks (kryptonite) are mutating the citizens of Smallville." Sounds like the newspaper noticed the mutations.
"She often teams up with Clark Kent and Pete Ross in tracking and stopping meteor infected people." Stop them from what?
"For the first four seasons, Chloe has unrequited love for Clark, but eventually accepts her place as his best friend and nothing more." "For"-->In.
"Later seasons saw Chloe discovering that she had a meteor rock power of her own, as well as introducing Jimmy Olsen, with whom she started dating and eventually married."-->In later seasons, Chloe discovered that she had a meteor rock power of her own; the character of Jimmy Olsen was introduced, with whom Chloe started dating and eventually married.
"Chloe Sullivan has been characterized as independent, intelligent, curious and impulsive by both the writers, and the actress that portrays her." No comma necessary.
"The latter two characteristics often get Chloe in trouble with both her friends, and with the Luthors." Can we use a better word than "get"?
"Allison Mack has been recognized with multiple award nominations and wins for her portrayal of Chloe Sullivan, including Saturn Awards and Teen Choice Awards." This sentence says "including", which implies an incomplete list. However, I looked at the "Reception" section, and those awards were the only ones she was nominated for.

As soon as the prose gets fixed up, I will pass. Consider asking someone from WP:PRV. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:05, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to find a couple of review to extend the reception section. I only found this one, but I'll continue to search for others. Corn.u.co.pia / Disc.us.sion 00:57, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This review is more of an analysis of the implications of Chloe's power. Still, it can be used. Corn.u.co.pia / Disc.us.sion 01:01, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I cleaned up the lead. I'll get started on the rest of the article as soon as I can. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 01:31, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've cleaned up the whole article, maybe you want to take a look and see what you think. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 00:52, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great, one more thing: "It allows Chloe the chance to reflect upon herself, and discover what things are most important to her – is it her career or her family and friends?" Why is there a question in the article? Dabomb87 (talk) 01:00, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should not have been a question mark, don't know why I didn't catch that when I went through. I've tweaked the whole statement. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 01:10, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, what of the review that Cornucopia provided above? Dabomb87 (talk) 01:11, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing the TV Squad source has is: "I think I've always taken Allison Mack for granted on Smallville; she's amazing." - that's not really enough to warrant inclusion. There is no context as to why this "reviewer" took her for granted, or why she was "amazing" in this episode. As for the IGN review, it's context is lost in the fact that the review talks about the potential of the "Chloe meteor-freak" storyline in the future. He doesn't talk about Allison Mack, nor does he talk about Chloe in the scene of "reception". So, basically, both are not very useful to this article. The IGN one sorta talks about the Clark and Chloe relationship, but it's so vague that it would just open up issues if it was used. That's the problem with using reviews of episodes for these things, is that these reviewers assume you have read (or can pull from) all of their other reviews/comments in the past, as they don't provide context to their opinions. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 01:21, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, pass, good job! Dabomb87 (talk) 02:14, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]