Talk:Max Havoc: Curse of the Dragon/GA1

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

Reviewer: Cirt (talk · contribs) 03:34, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

I will review this article. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:34, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

GA Review on Hold

 * 1) Thank you very much for your efforts to contribute to Quality improvement on Wikipedia, it's really most appreciated !!!
 * 2) NOTE: Please respond, below entire review, and not interspersed throughout, thanks!
 * 3) Suggestion: This suggestion is optional only, but I ask you to please at least read over the Good Article review instructions, and consider reviewing two to three (2-3) GA candidates from good articles nominations, for each one (1) that you nominate. Again, this is optional and a suggestion only, but please do familiarize yourself at least with how to review, and then think about it. Thank you. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:04, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

NOTE: Please respond, below entire review, and not interspersed throughout, thanks! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:19, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your review, and I appreciate your thorough efforts to validate the quality as well! :) I've (hopefully) followed your advice on most points. Here are my comments:
 * 1b. I hope this layout is OK. Please let me know if the lead needs copyediting; I don't have much time for Wikipedia these days, and I'm kind of in a hurry since you're reviewing Species at the same time ;)
 * 3a. Unfortunately, the information about the production is very scarce. I suppose I could milk some more content out of Pyun's interview, but then there wouldn't be anything new left in it for the more industrious readers. I don't want to turn this into a copyvio.
 * 3b. I streamlined Litigation a bit. Is this enough?
 * 5. Re: 6 September, it was about calling Vincent Klyn a veteran of Pyun's films. He does appear in a lot of them, and Sprinkler21 left the mention in the article. On 16 September, Sprinkler21 wanted to leave out the material about Max Havoc: Ring of Fire, the sequel. We agreed that it was notable enough to warrant a mention, so I added back some of the material into the Release section. You can see all our conversation at User talk:Sprinkler21 and the rest at Talk:Max Havoc: Curse of the Dragon.
 * 6a. Done, modeled after Loham image.
 * Daß Wölf (talk) 02:00, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Reevaluation by GA Reviewer
&mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:11, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Layout looks much, much better. Great job !!!
 * 2) Explanation read and acceptable for Stability issues, no worries. :)
 * 3) Okay I'll WP:AGF and trust your above statement that during the course of your research you haven't found much more Production info in secondary sources.
 * 4) Litigation sect looks quite good.
 * 5) Copyvio Detector results = "Violation Unlikely 17.4% confidence" = EXCELLENT, THIS IS WHAT WE LIKE TO SEE, THANK YOU !!!
 * 6) Checklinks tool = http://dispenser.homenet.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/webchecklinks.py?page=Max_Havoc:_Curse_of_the_Dragon = shows at least one problem link remaining to be archived, please = Filmmaker owes GEDA final $75,000 (info) [guampdn.com]
 * 7) Image fair use rationale looks much better.
 * 8) Have you at least read through the instructions linked above, in my suggestion from point 3, at top of review, as a suggested idea, which is just for you to consider, and optional only?
 * Fixed the link, that one slipped through the cracks as I was adding archiveurl/date. I've read your suggestion and will consider it once I find more time, as I have a lot to do IRL this month. I hope I won't be too lenient at it; you're setting some high standards here ;) Daß Wölf (talk) 03:04, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Congrats on getting a GA for the article, Daß Wölf! I'm buried also in RL at the moment but do have a comment/issue or two. It seems you've changed a passage in the production (?) section to read that Pyun had to "resort" to a crew from Los Angeles. It's fine that Pyun claims this but it seems we might want to include what some of those Los Angeles crew members thought about Pyun and his direction. There are numerous sources that list problems Los Angeles crews had with Pyun. Also, I don't understand scaling back the controversy section (now the litigation section) when the film is mostly known for its controversy. More later. Congrats again. Sprinkler21 (talk) 19:13, 17 October 2015 (UTC)Sprinkler 21

Passed as GA
Passed as GA. Thanks very much to GA Nominator for being so polite and responsive to GA Reviewer recommendations, above. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:22, 17 October 2015 (UTC)