Talk:Robert Kurrle

GA Review

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

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:RobertKurrle.1922.jpg = Y = no issues here.
2. File:RobertKurrle.Cinematographer.December161916.jpg = Y = no issues here.
3. File:KurrleRobertCareweEdwin.1929.jpg = Y = no issues here.
4. File:KurrleOnSiteInAfrica.jpg = {{not done}} = please add date to date field. Y
5. File:KurrleRobert.OnSiteInAfrica.1924.jpg = Y = no issues here.
6. File:RobertKurrle1932.jpg = Y = no issues here.

— Cirt (talk) 02:27, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

 Done - Onel5969 ^{TT me} 04:31, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Agreed, and thank you! — Cirt (talk) 04:35, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Stability assessment

1. Upon inspection of article edit history = no issues here going back -- to start of article itself in 2014.
2. Talk page shows absence of problems, as well.

Next, on to rest of review. — Cirt (talk) 02:31, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

GA on Hold

NOTE: Please respond, below entire review, and not interspersed throughout, thanks! — Cirt (talk) 04:13, 11 October 2015 (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.	Please go through and break up sentences, to make more succint. Be wary of too much use of commas.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Please expand lede intro sect, per WP:LEAD, so it can summarize the entire article by itself as a brief overview from start to finish of body text of article. Please break out Early life sect from Life and career, and expand it with some early info on family history, and a bit more on education and early film work if possible. Please move sect, Death, above sect, Filmography. Please make Filmography its own header level sect below that.
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.	Duly cited throughout to in-line citations
	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).	Does cite number 26 meet our standards for WP:RS ?
	2c. it contains no original research.	Relies primarily on secondary sources.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	See above about expanding more info about familiy life, education, early career if possible.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Good degree of focus, could be improved with breaking apart into more sub-sub-sects.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Written in a neutral tone.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Passes here, per above.
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.	No remaining issues here.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	No problems here.
	7. Overall assessment.	I will place this article as GA on Hold for a period of approximately Seven Days... — Cirt (talk) 04:21, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

I will place this article as GA on Hold for a period of approximately Seven Days... — Cirt (talk) 04:21, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

NOTE: Please respond, below entire review, and not interspersed throughout, thanks! — Cirt (talk) 04:13, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Here you go, Cirt.

1a-edited to tighten, break up longer sentences, more succinct.

1b-expanded lead as much as possible with RS. Not much on his early life. Reflects the body of the article better now. Broke out Early life section, and reorganized other sections per your suggestions.

2b-citation for what should be non-contentious issues within the article. If you disagree, will simply remove the citation.

2c-not sure what you want here. You didn't "pass" it, but the comment seems to indicate there is no issue.

3a-expanded the early career slightly. There's not much that can be added about his life/family since there are no reliable sources to cover it.

4-not sure here either.

Regardless, thanks for all the input. Look forward to your response. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Onel5969 (talk • contribs)

Passed as GA

Thanks for being so polite and responsive to my recommendations as GA Reviewer. Much appreciated, — Cirt (talk) 06:19, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

One last note: Please, consider reviewing two (2) WP:GAN candidates, for every one that you nominate. Thank you, — Cirt (talk) 06:20, 13 October 2015 (UTC)