Jump to content

Talk:Marching Men/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Maclean25 (talk · contribs) 05:51, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good article review (see Wikipedia:What is a good article? for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. 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):
    Two images used (both hosted on the Commons): File:Marching Men Cover.jpg tagged as cc-by-sa and File:Marching Men Advertisement.jpg tagged as public domain.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
Comments/Questions
Agreed, the "Today" was not good form. See what you think of the adjustment I made. I believe that the sentence refers to the latter part of the "Literary significance and criticism" section. --Olegkagan (talk) 01:57, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done.--Olegkagan (talk) 22:02, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can you add a quote from the novel? Nothing quite communicates the novel's style like a quote directly from the text.
There is a quote under Themes: Order versus disorder section. I can certainly pull another quote from the book, but where do you think in the article it could go?--Olegkagan (talk) 22:02, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I thought that was a quote from Anderson talking about the novel. I didn't realize that was a quote from the novel. maclean (talk) 15:41, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's in third-person. --Olegkagan (talk) 19:04, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • This article covers all the major aspects and is competently written. Perhaps the fact that it is written in the third-person should be included into the article as it describes part of the writing style. Otherwise, it meets the GA criteria and I am comfortable with passing it. maclean (talk) 00:33, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking the time to read and review the article! I'll see about sticking more about the writing style into the article in the future.--Olegkagan (talk) 01:58, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]