Talk:Robert Rossen/GA1

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

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Hi, I'll be reviewing this article. The rules for GA reviews are stated at Good Article criteria. I usually do reviews in the order: coverage; structure; detailed walk-through of sections (refs, prose, other details); images (after the text content is stable); lead (ditto). Feel free to respond to my comments under each one, and please sign each response, so that it's clear who said what.

When an issue is resolved, I'll mark it with  Done. If I think an issue remains unresolved after responses / changes by the editor(s), I'll mark it  Not done. Occasionally I decide one of my comments is off-target, and strike it out --Philcha (talk) 08:49, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BTW I've occasionally had edit conflicts in review pages, and to reduce this risk I'd be grateful if you'd let me know when you're most active, so I can avoid these times.

Coverage[edit]

WP:WIAGA requires "broad but focussed" coverage. I think there are serious gaps in coverage here:

  • Nothing about his personal life, which is expected in bios. The info box mentions a wife and one of the sections mentions a son, Stephen. Any other children? Dates of birth? Any other wives or significant relationships? Date ranges? Did any of these do anything notable? Any notable close friends? --Philcha (talk) 08:49, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Apart from the Academy award noms, no commentary about the quality and style of his work, nor about influences on his work, nor about anything / anyone his work may have influenced. --Philcha (talk) 08:49, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nothing about how he got his allegedly initial jobs as a Broadway playwright and stage manager. Getting work as a playwright usually requires contacts and a track record in lower-level theatre and / or writing in other fields - and 24 is young for a director in professional theatre, so explanation is needed. Getting work as a stage manager usually requires a track record in at least a couple of set design and construction, lighting, sound, props and costumes - or work as stage manager in lower-level theatre. --Philcha (talk) 08:49, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Re "he was not at that time a Communist" (1948) and taking the Fifth, was he ever a Communist? If so, how did he become one, did he cease to become one, etc.? --Philcha (talk) 08:49, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Who were his professional partners (e.g. favourite performers, cameramen, backstage crew), allies and rivals? --Philcha (talk) 08:49, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • IIRC the HUAC caused a lot of enmities in Hollywood and the arts generally, especially between those who named names and those who did not. To what extent did these affect Rossens' life and / or career? E.g. end of significant professional relationships.
  • It seems Rossen had long-term health problems, see Stephen's comments. I think more info is needed - in particular, these days "died ... following a series of illnesses" as quite likely to be interpreted as euphemism for AIDS (yes, I noticed Rossen died in 1966, but will all readers get the significance of that?). --Philcha (talk) 08:49, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pausing the review here, as filling these gaps may well change the article significantly. If you're willing to try to fill them, I'll be patient and set no deadlines, although I will expect progress. --Philcha (talk) 08:49, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Structure[edit]

Links check[edit]

(to be done when any issues in the main text have been resolved)

Use of images[edit]

(to be done when any issues in the main text have been resolved)

Lead[edit]

(to be done when any issues in the main text have been resolved)


  • I agree with the spirit of some of your comments, but others indicate that you're not reading the text carefully. For instance, the first sentence of section "Communism" advises when he joined and when he left the Communist Party and the next sentence explains why he joined. I have looked around for additional bio information (his other children are mentioned in the text) and have had little success. If including information on who got him his first job and what-not are going to be deal-breakers then you might as well close out this nomination. Thanks for your time in making the review. Otto4711 (talk) 18:22, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    You're right, I missed the the dates of his entry to and exit from the CP - but that raises another issue, as source I've seen (see below) says he left in 1945, and another "in approximately 1947". Looks like you may need to say e.g. "some time between ..." and cite several sources. --Philcha (talk) 20:29, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    More generally, the text is rather colourless and uniformative. My own cursory researches have found comments that: Rossen was an uneven director; Lilith, despite an unenthusiastic reception at the time, may be less vulnerable to becoming dated than his other work; his family name was Rosen. I didn't do anything clever, just a basic Google for "Robert Rossen". If I'm getting that stuff more easily, without going for Google Books or Google Scholar, I think there's probably a lot of usable material out there and you could make this article twice as good with a couple of hour's work. I've check a few WP articles on his movies, and they provide leads. --Philcha (talk) 20:29, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Other stuff I found: --Philcha (talk) 20:29, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    If you carry on looking, you'll find more. The bottom line is that you have to sift through a ton of gravel to get the nuggets. --Philcha (talk) 20:29, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I support Philcha's view that this article needs more work. It has some basic information, but is not well worded, has not organised the material helpfully, and more could be said. The lead is very poor. The current rating is Start class, though could be raised to C class as it matches the example of a C class article - [1] - given in the Bio WikiProject quality scale. Given that this article has been under review since May 12, and no substantial editing has taken place on the article in that time, and certainly none by the nominator, I feel that Philcha is being generous in not closing as a fail, and the nominator is advised to look to the suggestions and start making improvements. SilkTork *YES! 12:02, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Result of review[edit]

No attempt has been made to deal wth the obvious gaps in coverage that I raised nearly a month ago. I'm sorry to say this article fails to reach GA standard. --Philcha (talk) 05:18, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]


- - - - - please add review comments /responses above this line - - - - -
 If you want to start a new section of the Talk page while this review is still here, edit the whole page, i.e.use the "edit" link at the top of the page.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Robert_Rossen/GA1&oldid=1091481911"