Talk:Voss (Alexander McQueen collection)/GA1

GA Review

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

Nominator: Premeditated Chaos (talk · contribs) 21:43, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Generalissima (talk · contribs) 18:36, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know you're on vacation atm, but dibs on this one so you can get started on it when you get back! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 18:36, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Generalissima, if you don't think you have time for a review in the next week, you might consider tagging this for deletion via G6 so that someone else can start the review. There's a backlog drive happening next month that this article will be eligible for, so there's a good chance it will be picked up quickly. -- asilvering (talk) 00:33, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Asilvering: No, I will certainly have time to do this. I have been in touch with PMC about this. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 00:37, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prose

Went ahead and fixed a bunch of citation orders.

Solid lede. Does "oriental" need to be capitalized and in quotations? I feel one or the other works here.
Background is good, though I feel you have gotten them down to a science at this point.
You have two of the same cite (Davis 2001) in production details; intentional?
Concept and collection also very very good.
Runway show is good too! (Wow, he invited his parents?)
- "size of a size 16 "dress" I don't think those quotation marks are right. I know it says "size of a size" in the source, but I have no idea what that means whatsoever and thought it was a typo for "wrong side of a size" at first lol.
Reception well-written. Again, you got this down to a science.
Analysis, now this is where it really shines. This is a fascinating quantity of sources here. I just feel that its a lottt of names. Is there any way we could be quoting individual authors less and summarize related interpretations? Sorta along the lines of WP:RECEPTION but, yknow, not actually reception.
Aftermath and legacy good.

Sources

To do.

Broadness

For sure! It goes into intense detail, but this is warranted given the massive amount of coverage on this collection.

Neutrality

Seems not to give too much weight to particular opinions.

Stable

Yep.

Images

Good quality images for this one! Not a GA (or FA) criteria, but I'd recommend adding alt-text.