Talk:Daniel Faraday/GA1

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

Reviewer: Canada Hky (talk) 19:16, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

I'll be reviewing this. Upon a first inspection, there are no problems with the quick-fail criteria, so I will procede to a full review. Canada Hky (talk) 19:16, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Quick notes

 * There are DAB links to Matthew Fox and Stephen Williams.
 * There are issues with some links, including a dead link and several redirects - please check them out using the tool on this page.

General notes
In addition to the more mechanical notes detailed above regarding links, here are some things that need to be fixed up on the article.
 * The lead is perhaps a touch short. I think it would be possible to remove the citations in the lead, and properly reference the material later.  Saying the character was inspired by Michael Faraday without the quotes would suffice.  The second cite is not controversial, but it is not repeated later in the article.  Is the material covered by a different cite? ✅
 * The writing is usually in the present tense, rather than descriptive. Is this common to TV articles?  A more passive voice would contribute to a more encyclopedic tone. ✅
 * A good copy-edit woudl likely clear up some grammatical issues as well "The Others mistake them as military personnels", etc. ✅
 * In the section "Arc", a subheading for the firt paragraph would be helpful. It could be included in the subheading for the season in which it was revealed.  Or possibly included in a section "Background". ✅
 * "Oxford expells Daniel and quietly removes all references to him ever being at the university." Students are typically expelled, profs or researchers are fired. ✅
 * "Around this time, Daniel realizes the Secondary Protocol" - what's the Secondary Protocol? ✅
 * "internal character piece, "The Variable" was not "so much a great ending for Daniel.[40] - Dropping a "not" in front of a quote that in isolation seems to mean the opposite is confusing. That needs to be cleaned up, either with a more direct quote, or remove the quote to just express his general opinion. ✅
 * Bigger problem with this one - that sentence is taken almost verbatim from the source. Please fix this, and check for any other instances of close paraphrasing.  Canada Hky (talk) 02:42, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
 * There are inconsistencies in how numbers are written out. Generally, anything under ten is written out in words, greater than ten is in digits.  But, consistency is key. ✅
 * Ref #41, the title should be rendered in Title Case, rather than all caps. ✅
 * Images all look good, FUR for first, appropriate license for second.

That's a fair bit to work on for right now, I am going to put this on hold, and give the nominator (or anyone else) a chance to clear these things up. As some of the broader issues are cleared up, I will likely have some pickier things to point out. Good luck, and thanks for the interesting read. It brought back some good LOST moments. Canada Hky (talk) 19:46, 3 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Okkies, a lot of your problems have been sorted, I've yet to expand the lead, so I'll get right on that. That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 20:58, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Completed the lead now. Anything else you'd like me to do, please let me know. That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 21:15, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

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

OK, the bigger issues have been addressed, so let's get down to the more formal review and see how it shakes out. As a note, there is still the issue with teh very close paraphrasing that needs to be cleared up.
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * "After time traveling to 1977, Faraday is unknowingly shot and killed by his mother Eloise Hawking (Fionnula Flanagan)." Unknowingly shot? She knows she shot him, what's unknown is that he is her son.
 * Also in the lead, two consecutive sentences start with "Davies" - keep an eye for that in the rest of the text as well.
 * Also in the lead, two consecutive sentences start with "Davies" - keep an eye for that in the rest of the text as well.


 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * This is a tough area for me to evaluate. I think I will ask for someone a bit more unfamiliar with LOST to check in with their opinions, because I know what is going on, but it might be unfamiliar to someone less familiar with the finer details of the show.
 * 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, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * I am going to put this on hold. There are a few things to address, and I will ask for a second opinion for clarity on plot and other details.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * I am going to put this on hold. There are a few things to address, and I will ask for a second opinion for clarity on plot and other details.
 * I am going to put this on hold. There are a few things to address, and I will ask for a second opinion for clarity on plot and other details.

Second Opinion: I would appreciate it if someone could comment on the clarity of the character development sections regarding what happens on the TV show. LOST is a rather complicated show, and as an avid fan, I feel I might be taking some things for granted that are not properly explained. Canada Hky (talk) 17:40, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Everything has been addressed, including the issues raised by the reviewer who provided a second opinion. Congrats on a good article!Canada Hky (talk) 03:45, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Second Opinion
OK here goes: Well, that's it. Jezhotwells (talk) 08:55, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
 *  During his tenure, Daniel encountered Desmond Hume (Henry Ian Cusick), who was suffering from temporal displacement trapping him between 2004 and 1996. - Why not " between 1996 and 2004"? ✅
 * While in Essex, Massachusetts, Daniel saw a news report covering the discovery of the apparent wreckage of Oceanic Flight 815 in the depths of the Sunda Trench. Widmore approached Daniel and urged him to go to the island, which he said would heal him of his plight. Confusing - reckage discovered "in the depths of the Sunda Trench", yet Daniel was urged "to go to the island". Which is it - a deep sea trench or an island? ✅
 * Faraday first arrives on the island on December 23, 2004. How does he arrive? ✅
 * Later, the corpse of the freighter's doctor washes ashore. Jack Shephard (Matthew Fox) confronts Faraday and he is forced to confess that the freighter was not sent to the island to rescue the survivors.[ What is this "freighter"? ✅
 * In the afterlife, whereby Oceanic Flight 815 does not crash on the Island, Faraday has a different background. Needs re-writing in good plain English, presently an ungrammatical mess. ✅
 * After overhearing Eloise persuading Desmond to stop pursuing Penelope Milton (Sonya Walger),... Very poor prose. Try reading it out aloud! ✅
 * I've now implemented all suggestions here and mentioned above by User:Canada Hky. --That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 15:57, 10 May 2011 (UTC)