Talk:Joker (character)/GA1

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

Reviewer: FruitMonkey (talk · contribs) 23:59, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

I will be picking up this GA review, and will give detailed feed back over the next 48 hours. I have been involved in bringing 10 articles to GA status and I have a knowledge of silver age and modern comics which I hope will help with getting this article across the line. FruitMonkey (talk) 23:59, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Summing up
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

Review notes
1. Reasonably well written.
 * A. Prose: On the whole the prose is good and the written style and information is interesting.
 * I would suggest that after a book, graphic novel or comic the year is given to help aid chronology of story lines and concepts.


 * Golden Age
 * Needs dates as the casual reader will not understand what the Golden Age of comic is.
 * Last sentence needs a cite.


 * Silver Age
 * Needs dates as the casual reader will not understand what the Silver Age of comic is.
 * Comic book terms are being used but not wikilinked to aid the casual reader: 'retcon' and later 'one-shot' and 'crossover'.
 * The Silver Age of DC comics runs from 1956 until 1970, and only the first paragraph addresses the history of this time, it seems disproportionate to the rest of the article.
 * The second paragraph is very confusing to the casual reader. What is its importance?
 * Needs cites.


 * Post Crisis'
 * This section needs the largest overhaul. It is too large and unruly, covering far too much specific plot detail without showing chronology or why the stories are important to the character, who wrote them, etc.
 * Far too much plot of individual stories which are not major turning points of the character. Sections such as "Emperor Joker" can be written in a single sentence.
 * 'who, unknown to him, was then known as Batgirl' Known by who?


 * Powers, abilities, and equipment
 * Maybe an opening sentence to explain the characters main powers or lack thereof, which is unusual outside Batman's universe.
 * Equipment is returned to in the section entitled 'Character'.
 * 'The Joker is rendered sane by a nuclear war' how is this paragraph connected to Powers, abilities, and equipment.
 * The section refers to the Joker's ability to cheat death, and in one section states he was 'fatally' wounded, but does not explain if this is a power, illusions or just a running joke by the writers.
 * 'Joker's skills (sic) in combat also differ in the film and television adaptations.' How?
 * Despite multiple references to the Joker's face, as far as I can see little is made of his dress sense and iconic purple suit. That too should be addressed.


 * B. MoS compliance:
 * Lead. To meet GA criteria 1(b), which relates to specific manual of style guidelines, the article needs to comply with the advice in WP:LEAD. That is, in addition to being an introduction, the lead needs to be an adequate overview of the whole of the article. As a rough guide, each major section in the article should be represented with an appropriate summary in the lead. Also, the article should provide further details on all the things mentioned in the lead. Points mentioned in the lead but not covered in the article include 1) any critical reception. 2) depictions in other media (although another article exists to take the reader to a more detailed section, that article is not GA, so there needs to be at least a brief overview on this page to inform the reader.) 3) Popularity, the final paragraph in the lead details the character's popularity but this is not mentioned in the main article.


 * Citations. Citations use correct formatting throughout. Some cites to comic books use the Cite comic template, while others don't. The 'Joker is number 2' (cite 4) uses a citation template but is not completed. Several cites missing dates and accessdates.

2: Factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:


 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary
 * Several sections with few citations. In particular the sections Character and Powers, abilities, and equipment which have paragraphs uncited.
 * It would be good to see some investigation into how writers outside the comic world view the Joker. There are multiple books outside on the subject and none are explored here. A quick search brings up some volumes that could aid a critical study of the character:
 * The Joker: A Visual History of the Clown Prince of Crime Matthew Manning
 * The Best Batman Villians Exposed: Beyond The Joker Kim Swanson
 * Batman and Psychology: A Dark and Stormy Knight Travis Langley
 * The Many Lives of the Batman: Critical Approaches to a Superhero and His Media
 * Batman L Daniels
 * BATMAN UNAUTHORISED: Vigilantes, Jokers, and Heroes in Gotham City Dennis O'Neil
 * The Many Lives of the Batman: Critical Approaches to a Superhero and His Media Roberta Pearson


 * C. No original research

3: Broad in its coverage
 * A. Major aspects
 * Would gain from a section exploring 'Supporting characters' and 'Critical reception' the latter of which is mentioned in the lead.
 * The sections 'Other versions' and 'In other media' need to be expanded.
 * B. Focused
 * Lacks focus in the section Post Crisis, where it just strings together story lines. Needs to be tighter, less detailed and needs to focus on a larger character arc. Maybe looking at the interpretation by different writers.

6:Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * Images appear to be chosen for a specific reason apart from the cover of Batman 251, the free-use rationale of which is to give an "Illustration of a specific point within the article." The article fails to do this, it mentions the comic, but there is no reason given as to why the illustration is needed.

Pass/Fail
I've put the article on hold to allow editors to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. FruitMonkey (talk) 11:56, 27 August 2012 (UTC)


 * It has been several weeks, and only minimal changes have been made to the article. If the article hasn't made any significant progress toward becoming a Good Article, it is probably time to end the review. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:20, 24 September 2012 (UTC)


 * A request was made to hold the article for a few weeks, but no work has been done, and as the article is way off GA, it has to be a fail. FruitMonkey (talk) 21:50, 27 September 2012 (UTC)