Talk:James Bond/GA1

GA Reassessment
In order to uphold the quality of Good articles, all articles listed as Good articles are being reviewed against the GA criteria as part of the GA project quality task force. While all the hard work that has gone into this article is appreciated, unfortunately, as of June 21, 2009, this article fails to satisfy the criteria, as detailed below. For that reason, the article has been delisted from WP:GA. However, if improvements are made bringing the article up to standards, the article may be nominated at WP:GAN. If you feel this decision has been made in error, you may seek remediation at WP:GAR. :''This discussion is transcluded from Talk:James Bond/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.''

I am reassessing this articles GA status as part of the WP:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force/Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:09, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Quick fail criteria assessment I find no problems checking against the quick fail criteria. Proceeding to substantive review. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:15, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability.
 * 2) The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.
 * 3) There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including cleanup, wikify, NPOV, unreferenced or large numbers of fact, clarifyme, or similar tags.
 * 4) The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.
 * 5) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.
 * 1) The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.
 * 2) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.
 * 1) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.
 * 1) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.

Checking against GA criteria

 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose):
 * Creation and inspiration
 * Two paragraphs are completely un-referenced. Other paragraphs are only sparsely referenced.
 * Novels and related works
 * no citation for the Faulks book
 * Adaptations
 * In the late 1950s, EON Productions guaranteed the film adaptation rights for every 007 novel... guaranteed? Surely they purchased them? Please clarify.
 * Non-EON films, radio and television programmes
 * First three and the last paragraph are unreferenced.
 * Cultural impact
 * This section is nearly all about parodies, can no other examples of cultural impact be found?
 * Music
 * Apart from the beginning, this section is lacking references.
 * Video games
 * Likewise, mostly missing references.
 * Bond video games, however, did not reach their popular stride until Popular stride, consider re-wording.
 * Subsequently, virtually every Bond video game has attempted to copy the accomplishments and features of GoldenEye 007 to varying degrees of success; even going so far as to have a game entitled GoldenEye: Rogue Agent that had little to do with either the video game GoldenEye 007 or the film of the same name. Clumsy, rewrite for style.
 * Section is rather too detailed, consider summarizing.
 * Comic strips and comic books
 * Completely unreferenced
 * Vehicles and gadgets
 * Very few references
 * Lead
 * The lead omits coverage of the later sections (after films). The lead should be an executive summary of the entire article.
 * Overall
 * I have made some minor copy-edits, but I would recommend more thorough attention to the prose style. The article is fairly well written, but could be improved.
 * b (MoS):
 * Broadly complies
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references):
 * As mentioned above some sections lack references. All online references are live links apart from {http://www.007james.com/} which appears to be dead. Several others are redirected. You can check this with {http://toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/webchecklinks.py?page=James_Bond}
 * References #16 -#29 should have ISBNs
 * #2 and #5 appear to be to the same source; #11 and #12 nead full citations rather than just html links; likewise #30, #31, #34, #36, #40, #41, #44, #45, #50. Please aim for consistent formatting of references throughout.
 * b (citations to reliable sources):
 * Reference #1 does not link to a WP:RS; {http://www.hmss.com/} does not appear to be a RS, neither do refs 40, 41, 44, 45
 * c (OR):
 * Apparently no OR, but as mentioned some sections lack full referencing.
 * 1) It is broad in its scope.
 * a (major aspects):
 * The article is reasonably broad in scope
 * b (focused):
 * Perhaps too much detail in video games and music. The article is about James Bond, not the music used in films or the (mostly) marketing spin-offs of films.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * It appears to adhere to NPOV
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * No edit warring
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
 * Np problems here
 * b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * Captions OK
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * OK, I am going to put the article on hold for seven days for the above concerns to be addressed. Please place any comments / queries here, either after my comments or below this. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:28, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * As none of these points have been addressed I am delisting the article. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:01, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, I am going to put the article on hold for seven days for the above concerns to be addressed. Please place any comments / queries here, either after my comments or below this. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:28, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * As none of these points have been addressed I am delisting the article. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:01, 21 June 2009 (UTC)