Talk:Sauron/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: BennyOnTheLoose (talk · contribs) 19:53, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

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

Fictional history

• wikilink "Vala", "Quenya"

Done.

• "breaking the cosmic Music with discord" - could do with a bit of explanation.

Glossed.

• "which Sauron followed" - followed chronologically, or in the sense of "acted according to"?

"continued".

• "Downfall" isn't a word used in the previous section consider renaming that section "Downfall of Númenor" or decapitalising it in the text.

Fixed.

• "Gollum's friend.." should this be "Sméagol's friend.."? I don't think he was called Gollum at that time. If this is changed, then there should be a mention that he was later known as Gollum, as that name occurs a few times in the article.

Quite right. Done.

Appearance

• Suggest adding a word or to to introduce Gorlim.

Glossed.

• "who has daunting eyes" - I think should be "who had daunting eyes"

Done.

• "This raises the question of whether an "Eye" was Sauron's actual manifestation," - is that within "The Black Gate is Closed"?

No it's Christopher Tolkien. Repeated ref for clarity.

Concept and creation

• "probably of the Eldar elves" is missing a citation. (Unless already supported by the Auden source.)

Removed.

• "Other critics came closer to the mark;" - only one is mentioned, either reword or mention another. (Unless already supported by the Auden source.)

Reworded.

• "1967" - publication was June 1968, but the conjecture may well be from 1967. Just noting this in case there is a typo in a year.

Fixed.

Interpretations

• Looks fine.

Noted.

Adaptations

• "portrayed as a humanoid creature ... in Ralph Bakshi's 1978 animated version" needs a source.

Fixed.

• I had my doubts about cedmagic as a source but after looking at the author page, I think it's acceptable.

Noted.

• The Telegraph source doesn't support all the titles listed for video games.

Added ref.

In culture

• Looks fine.

Noted.

Infobox and Lead

• Both look fine.

Noted.

Images

• No issues.

Noted.

Copyvio and plagiarism check

• Checked all matches above 4% on Earwig's Copyvio Detector. No concerns.

Noted.

Happy to discuss, or be challenged on, any of my review comments. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:53, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for all your work on the article Chiswick Chap. I find the article to be comprehensive, balanced, well-structured and well-written. I've listed some points for consideration above. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 21:20, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Many thanks! Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:57, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your responses, Chiswick Chap. I'm happy to pass the article for GA. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 20:51, 3 July 2020 (UTC)