Talk:Dr. No (film)/GA2

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

Reviewer: Matthew RD 18:03, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello, I shall be conducting this review. At first glance the article seems to be in descent shape, but I'll have a more thorough look at it soon. -- Matthew RD 18:03, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your patience, now lets get on with the review. I may do bits at a time. This is how the article fairs against the GA criteria:
 * 1) Well written: ❌, just a few notes below. Address those, and I'll pass it
 * 2) Factually accurate: Sources all seem reliable, mostly from print sources (books) and DVD features, web sources mostly link to newspapers. ✅
 * 3) Broadness in coverage: ✅
 * 4) Neutral: ✅
 * 5) Stability: No issue, just a nice lot of work between Shrodinger's cat and Betty Logan ✅
 * 6) Images: They both check out fine ✅

Plot

 * Section is under the 700 word limit per WP:FILMPLOT, summarises the film nicely.

Cast

 * "ultimately had her voice dubbed over due to heavy accent." Did you mean "ultimately had her voice dubbed over due to a heavy accent"? ✅--Schrodinger&#39;s cat is alive (talk) 13:39, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * "requered", I think you meant "required" ✅--Schrodinger&#39;s cat is alive (talk) 13:39, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * "LeWars had make-up to invoke Asian heritage, and eventually was dubbed over." I'm a little confused by that, did that mean her voice was dubbed? ✅--Schrodinger&#39;s cat is alive (talk) 13:39, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Production

 * No issues there, everything checks out fine.

Themes

 * The second paragraph is unsourced. ✅--Schrodinger&#39;s cat is alive (talk) 14:29, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I'll continue later, so far it seems in order for GA pass. -- Matthew RD 11:20, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Here's more,

Reception

 * "Upon release, Dr. No receiving a mixed critical reception", I think you meant it received mixed critical reception. ✅--Schrodinger&#39;s cat is alive (talk) 13:40, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

And that is that. Just these to sort out, and I will pass the article and thereby bringing back its former GA glory. Good luck. -- Matthew RD 13:29, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * That was quick, well done. I will now pass it. The article is good again. -- Matthew RD 15:41, 14 July 2011 (UTC)