Talk:Indiana Jones (character)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Zanimum (talk · contribs) 00:31, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

This appears to be a pretty straight-forward "pass"; I'll take a look at this tonight in detail, hopefully post a reply in the next few days. -- Zanimum (talk) 00:31, 19 December 2012 (UTC)


 * There are three "citation needed" tags... can these be cleared up?
 * I've gone through "Origins and inspirations", and it's got my thumbs up. The language in the "Ethical issues for archaeology" varies from very formal to too casual, like "Indiana Jones doesn't seem to be striving very hard." Just a forewarning that it wouldn't meet FA, as true as the statement is.
 * There's new citation needs in "Costume", but the prose is good. Note that I just watched the referenced video, and didn't hear Harrison Ford mumble anything about the stapler. It's a very good reference for other parts of the costume section, just not sure if it is for that. --  Zanimum (talk) 17:48, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Okay, so the rest of the review, most issues are the lack of references. Can we clear any of these up? Search the article for "citation needed". There's one slightly out-of-date info indirectly related to Jones himself, and two confusing sentences, below.
 * Appearances: "There were rumors that LaBeouf will take over the Indy franchise." Should it be noted that he's made comments that essentially burned that rope bridge behind him, pardon the pun? http://blastr.com/2012/08/shia-labeouf-deeply-regre.php
 * Character description and formation:
 * The teenage Indiana bases his own look on a figure from the prologue of Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, after being given his hat.[33] Huh? I think I know what this means, but the wording is wonky. Perhaps “In the prologue of Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Jones is seen as a teenager, establishing his look when given a hat.”
 * The section on the Temple of Doom needs better clarity. I think I've helped with this edit, but I'm still not totally clear on things. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Indiana_Jones&diff=529184501&oldid=529183215

Thanks! -- Zanimum (talk) 23:12, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The cite tags are still there after a month; failing this. Wizardman  19:18, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Removal of "Ethical Issues" section
I've removed the section called "Ethical Issues", which talked about some of the negative implications of Indiana Jones's impact on the field of archaeology. It's okay to put something like this in there, but the section read more like an editorial in Archaeology Weekly than anything you'd expect to find in an encyclopedia. It included two sources, but one of these did not mention Indiana Jones at all and the second did so only once and in passing, with the sentence, ''"Most Americans absorb archaeology from such media spectacles as Indiana Jones."

I don't have any problem with re-adding a section like this, but it needs to summarize existing, published commentary on Indiana Jones and his impact on the field of archeology. I have no doubt that such material exists. But it cannot posit its own extrapolations on the subject because original research is not permitted here.--Xiaphias (talk) 08:32, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Also the section should probably be called something like "Impact on Archaeology". Or better yet, you could use the word that means meta-archaeology, if there is one. (For example, meta-history&mdash;the study of the study of history&mdash;is called "historiography".) --Xiaphias (talk) 08:40, 24 March 2013 (UTC)