Talk:Bringing Up Baby/GA1

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

Reviewer: Krimuk90 (talk · contribs) 15:40, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Will review shortly. -- KRIMUK  90  ✉  15:40, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

A well written article, and definitely meets the GA-criteria. This is going to be an embarrassingly short review:


 * I read through the peer review, and I must say that was quite a discussion on in-line citations. Having reviewed several of Blofeld's articles in the past I can safely assume that the claims are covered in the sources provided, but while every single sentence does not need in-line citations, it would be good to provide one for these claims:
 * 1. Image caption in the casting section: "...while Grant was rapidly becoming a major star."
 * Removed claim.♦ Dr. Blofeld  13:25, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 2. In reception: "The film received good advance reviews, and RKO expected a hit."
 * 3. Use of "gay" section: "According to Robert Chapman's Dictionary of American Slang, the adjective "gay" was used by homosexuals among themselves since at least 1920."


 * In the D&W section, Gunga Din is in italics in some places and in quotes elsewhere. Maintain consistency.
 * Reception section: "In a Variety review "Wear" praised the film,..". Not sure what "Wear" is supposed to signify here.
 * In the "external links" section, why is "Theater of Romance" in boldface?

I will be happy to pass when these are addressed. -- KRIMUK  90  ✉  12:33, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. Addressed all except the 1920 one which I can't access in gb. I've added the book but can't access the page number. I'll ask Deo if he has access. but it's not stopping it passing is it?♦ Dr. Blofeld  13:39, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Haha, no no, it's fine. :) -- KRIMUK  90  ✉  13:52, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail: -- KRIMUK  90   ✉  13:52, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Deo has bought a book I believe so it'll continue to be worked on and a themes section added etc.♦ Dr. Blofeld  13:56, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah. You should take it to the FAC after that. Good luck! :) -- KRIMUK  90  ✉  13:59, 6 April 2014 (UTC)