Talk:James Dunn (actor)/GA1

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

Reviewer: MonkeyStolen234 (talk · contribs) 18:08, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it well written?
 * A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
 * B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * 1) Is it verifiable with no original research?
 * A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
 * B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons&mdash;science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
 * C. It contains no original research:
 * D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
 * B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Thanks for the review! I spent a whole week digging up sources, and it paid off! Best, Yoninah (talk) 19:13, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
 * You're very welcome! Have a great day! —MonkeyStolen234 (talk) 19:46, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Thanks for the review! I spent a whole week digging up sources, and it paid off! Best, Yoninah (talk) 19:13, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
 * You're very welcome! Have a great day! —MonkeyStolen234 (talk) 19:46, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Thanks for the review! I spent a whole week digging up sources, and it paid off! Best, Yoninah (talk) 19:13, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
 * You're very welcome! Have a great day! —MonkeyStolen234 (talk) 19:46, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
 * You're very welcome! Have a great day! —MonkeyStolen234 (talk) 19:46, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Further review

 * Reopening per discussion with MonkeyStolen234, I'll add some more comments. Kingsif (talk) 00:34, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Lead fine
 * Photos all free
 * The quote box in Early film and stage career could easily be incorporated into the prose - neither section or quote are long enough to warrant the use


 * Some of the images may need re-scaling.
 * ✅ Resized images


 * Perhaps merge the screen persona and recognition sections


 * Copyvio check looks fine
 * Talk page and history are clean and stable
 * Sources for the most part very good; many are inaccessible. Some are less reliable generally (Family Search), but seem fit for purpose in the limited use.
 * I was told that FamilySearch is fine for official U.S. state birth and death records.


 * Prose:
 * Overcoverage of the Shippan Point incident. It's a second-by-second play of a relatively minor incident, and with no other extra details in the section it is undue detail.
 * ✅ Reduced


 * Link 'Fox' to the most appropriate article in A Fox employee asked
 * Fox Film is linked in the previous sentence. I repeated "Fox Film" here without the link, but the word "Film" is redundant.


 * While Metro was not - is this not more commonly shortened to MGM?


 * Link Borzage to Fox when introducing him in this context.


 * Signing a Fox contract and mother moving out can be one sentence


 * The reference for A Baltimore Evening Sun review was typical of the praise lavished on Dunn: "Without Dunn, Bad Girl would be just another movie. With him, it's something that provokes chuckles, tears, laughs, sighs and everything else that a nice little movie hopes to provoke" is just the review - there's nothing supporting that it "was typical of the praise lavished on Dunn", which is NPOV language without a source
 * ✅ I could cite a slew of reviews here but that would be undue. Hope you like my rewrite.


 * The Mollie Merrick quotation is awkward. The sentence is phrased for incorporation, but then goes into a very lengthy block quote. I'd rephrase the little introduction to fix this, and probably cut down the amount quoted.
 * ✅ Removed whole section


 * The parenthesis about the Baby Take a Bow title could be plain prose, at the end of the sentence or incorporated into the Temple again plays Dunn's daughter in this hit film sentence.


 * The sentence Though Temple always received top billing[28] and her career soon eclipsed his, Dunn professed to being one of her fans just seems awkward - I don't know if the contradictory conclusion that he "professed to be one of her fans" naturally follows the fact she "always had top billing" and a career that eclipsed his. Why would any of that negate him being her fan? Maybe rearrange, putting the fan part in with the professionalism sentence just before, and make the top billing/career sentence a simple statement


 * Also, But he admired Temple's professionalism isn't a complete sentence. What is the 'but' following? (It's a new sentence, so 'Despite this,' would be used)


 * But a friend, actress and dancer Gloria Grafton, urged casting directors involved in the extensive talent search to hire him - same problem. "However, a friend..." is the way to go


 * The production budget ballooned by 10% - is that really a ballooning budget?
 * ✅ Reworded


 * In the mention of leap year and proposals, perhaps link to Bachelor's Day (tradition)?


 * Move the Associated Press wikilink up - it's mentioned in an earlier section


 * The Morse code Christmas anecdote should have some tie to an aspect of his personal life - the section is well-developed, and this seems like unnecessary padding. E.g. is it part of his sense of humor, or are Malibu and Morse code some of his interests?
 * ✅ Removed whole paragraph


 * Move up Malibu wikilink


 * Shouldn't be too much to do here. Kingsif (talk) 07:43, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * thank you, I'm happy to address these issues. Please give me some time. Yoninah (talk) 09:56, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Sure, and I don't think this will affect the DYK run, in case you were wondering. Kingsif (talk) 20:56, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * fixes done. Yoninah (talk) 19:25, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Great, should be fine unless you want to update the GA banner? Kingsif (talk) 19:40, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what you mean; is that a joke? Yoninah (talk) 19:44, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Not a joke, but in a few GANR I've seen and done, if substantial work has been done the GA banner on the talk page has had the date/oldid updated. (there's not been so much work needed here, that's why I asked, because I'm not sure it's necessary) Kingsif (talk) 19:46, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * well, you know more about it than me. I'm fine either way. Thank you again for your suggestions for improvement. Yoninah (talk) 19:47, 11 June 2020 (UTC)