Talk:Lightning McQueen/GA1

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

Nominator: 07:39, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Heidi Pusey BYU (talk · contribs) 19:31, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for nominating this article for GA. My name is Heidi, and I'm paid by BYU to edit Wikipedia. I will be the one reviewing this article. Heidi Pusey BYU (talk) 19:31, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

, this article is ready to be approved for GA. Congratulations! Heidi Pusey BYU (talk) 21:11, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Well-written:
✅ a. The prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and

✅ b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

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. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);

✅c. it contains no original research; and

✅d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.

Broad in its coverage:
✅a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and

✅b.it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail.

Neutral:
✅ a. it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Stable
✅ a. it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

✅a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and

✅b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

General writing
The writing is generally well-done, but I do have some suggestions and questions:
 * In the lede it mentions McQueen’s role in Cars 1, but it doesn’t actually say it was in Cars 1. I’d recommend mentioning that, since Cars 2 and 3 are mentioned. Heidi Pusey BYU (talk) 19:08, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Also in lede: maybe make the mention of NASCAR commentary less general. Heidi Pusey BYU (talk) 19:08, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * “[T]he animators worked to improve their expressions, such as smiling, where the lower lids had to be pulled up slightly to connect to the mouth.” This is confusing. Heidi Pusey BYU (talk) 19:08, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Both Characterization and Design summarize the process of designing the cars. Is it possible to do some condensing and combine them into one section? Heidi Pusey BYU (talk) 19:08, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The summary for Cars 2 says Axelrod is “the mastermind behind the plot”, but doesn’t specify what the plot is. This would be a good thing to add. Heidi Pusey BYU (talk) 19:08, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * “Story supervisor Bob Peterson said that they took one athlete's response to the question of how to know when it is time to change by putting it in the film: ‘The kids will tell you.’” I don’t feel like this adds much to the article. We've already read about how athletes have different approaches to aging, and I feel like this doesn't enhance that idea. Heidi Pusey BYU (talk) 18:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)