Talk:Dawn of the Dead (2004 film)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: MyCatIsAChonk (talk · contribs) 18:02, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

I'll review this, expect it to be done in the next few days. -MyCatIsAChonk (talk) 18:11, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

• Thanks for taking this review. I made some expansions as well as pared the plot down to 636 words, so please check to see if these changes still satisfy the "well written" criterion. Furthermore, some of the offline sources cited—such as FNs 8 and 22—can be accessed on YouTube if you must check their verifiability; just search them on that site by typing in the title. Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk) 09:03, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

  Thanks for fixing the plot; as for the YouTube videos, I suggest you link those within the citations; even if they are from YouTube, it's about what the content is, so linking videos to those citations would be helpful to readers. Thanks! -MyCatIsAChonk (talk) 17:09, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Well-written and understandable; some of the more technical sections, like makeup effects and VFX, are nicely written and understandable.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Complies with MoS standards, though the plot section is 16 words above the 700 word limit for plot sections; it's still passable though.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Contains appropriately formatted references section, with an external links section below.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Most citations are from news sites or magazines like IGN, Variety, Bloody Disgusting, and IndieWire.
	2c. it contains no original research.	Claims are all correctly cited and linked; the boldest statement in the article is "Numerous publications have named Dawn of the Dead as Zack Snyder's best film." and this is linked to six citations supporting it. Nicely done!
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Copyvio check shows none, and quotes are properly cited back to their sources.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	All sections are addressed in the lead and elaborated upon further in; the longest section is "Reception" (especially the theatrical release section), but even these stay in the scope by addressing contrasting types of reviews and opinions. Shows both sides of the argument well; very nice!
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Stays focused; only "main article" link is in the section about the spiritual successor (Army of the Dead) and that section is kept nice and short.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	The article (most notably "Reception") stays neutral and only cites opinions from correctly cited sources.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	No edit wars since creation.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	All media is tagged correctly. Only fair-use media is here and here, and they are both properly tagged.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Media is relevant; most is pictures of people involved in the film, and one gif of a BTS clip is relevant to the principal photography section.
	7. Overall assessment.	Overall, this article is well-written, properly cited, illustrated, and neutral/stable. Very nice job and thank you to @Nineteen Ninety-Four guy: for nominating and creating almost all of this article!