Talk:Blackrock (play)/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: West Virginian (talk · contribs) 14:10, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

, I will be engaging in a review of this article within the next 48 hours. Please let me know if you have any questions regarding this article in the meantime! Thanks! -- West Virginian   (talk)  14:10, 30 July 2015 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

, I've completed a thorough and comprehensive review and re-review of your article, and I find that it meets the criteria outlined for passage to Good Article status. Prior to its passage, however, I have shared below some comments and questions that should first be addressed. It has been a privilege to review this article and I look forward to your feedback. Thanks! -- West Virginian   (talk)  15:24, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Lede
 * The image of the play's book cover is appropriately tagged with a "Media data and Non-free use rationale" and a book cover copyright license. This is therefore acceptable for inclusion in this article.
 * The template is beautifully formatted and its contents are either cited in the template or in the article's prose.
 * Per Manual of Style/Lead section, the lede is stands alone as a concise overview of the article. The lead defines the play, establishes context for the play, explains why the play is notable, and summarizes the most important points of the play.
 * Blackrock should be bolded AND italicized in its first mention in the lede paragraph, as it is a formal title of a published work, like A Property of the Clan.
 * Done. Freikorp (talk) 15:39, 30 July 2015 (UTC)


 * The lede is otherwise well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no further comments or questions for this section.

Plot
 * This is a minor suggestion, but eleven can be rendered 11 here, which would make it consistent with 18th birthday and 15-year-old.
 * Done. Freikorp (talk) 15:39, 30 July 2015 (UTC)


 * The three boys are arrested for the sexual assault, but not also for her murder? If they are also arrested for her murder, this should be stated here.
 * No they were only arrested for the sexual assault. Freikorp (talk) 15:39, 30 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Consider rephrasing as "he grabbed a rock and struck her."
 * Done. Freikorp (talk) 15:39, 30 July 2015 (UTC)


 * I'd consider adding a comma in the natural pause following "In the play's last scene..."
 * Done. Freikorp (talk) 15:39, 30 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Also consider rephrasing as "asks his cousin Cherie to throw [or dispose of] the vehicle's keys into ocean when she goes out surfing." Dump seems like a word to use when disposing of a larger item.
 * Good point. Done. Freikorp (talk) 15:39, 30 July 2015 (UTC)


 * This section is otherwise well-written and I have no further comments or questions for this section.

Development
 * Newcastle should be wiki-linked to Newcastle, New South Wales here for those of us unfamiliar with NSW's second most populated area.
 * Good point. Done. Freikorp (talk) 15:39, 30 July 2015 (UTC)


 * "Lee's family, who had learned of the play" would probably flow better.
 * Done. Freikorp (talk) 15:39, 30 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Freewheels is now italicized in the first paragraph of the "Reception of A Property of the Clan" subsection. Since it is not italicized elsewhere, I would suggest making it consistent throughout the prose.
 * Done. Freikorp (talk) 15:39, 30 July 2015 (UTC)


 * High-schools doesn't need to be hyphenated here, but perhaps this is an Australian vs. American English issue.
 * Done. Freikorp (talk) 15:39, 30 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Ensure that inline citations are placed in numeral order, and at the end of sentences where possible or appropriate. It looks better to consolidate citations at the end of sentences to improve sentence flow, but this is merely a suggestion.
 * I think I got all the inline citations in numerical order. The reason some of the inline citations do not appear at the end of the sentence is because they don't back up the whole sentence, rather just up to where the citation is placed. Do you think I should still move the citation to the end of the sentence? Freikorp (talk) 15:57, 30 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Reception of Blackrock could stand to have its own section outside of "Development."
 * Hmm if I did that I think i'd need to reorganise how the reception appears for both plays. What do you think of this change: ? Freikorp (talk) 15:57, 30 July 2015 (UTC)


 * This section is otherwise well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no further comments or questions for this section.

Premiere production
 * Would citation 17 also account for: "All other roles were played by members of the company"? If so, I would place it after this sentence so that it, too, is sourced.
 * Yes the citation does account for that. Good point. I added it as an inline citation. Freikorp (talk) 15:39, 30 July 2015 (UTC)


 * This section is otherwise well-written and I have no further comments or questions for this section.

Film adaptation
 * This section is well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no comments or questions for this section.

Notes
 * This section is well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no comments or questions for this section.
 * , upon my re-review of the article, I find that you have adequately addressed my comments, questions, and concerns, and it is hereby a pleasure for me to pass this article to Good Article status. Thank you for all your tremendous work in researching and writing this article. -- West Virginian   (talk)  16:00, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help. :) Freikorp (talk) 16:01, 30 July 2015 (UTC)