Talk:Merian C. Cooper/GA1

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

Reviewer: RL0919 (talk · contribs) 02:11, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

I just added a nom to the category, so only fair that I take the one from other end of the queue. Expect to complete review by the end of the week. --RL0919 (talk) 02:11, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Review summary immediately below, with more detailed comments after. This isn't quite ready for GA, but the issues seem like they could be resolved somewhat quickly (especially if you have some alternative sources for the sourcing issues), so putting on hold for a week to let editors work on the issues.


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: On hold pending resolution of issues
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: On hold pending resolution of issues
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: On hold pending resolution of issues

Prose concerns:
 * I did some basic copy editing in a few spots; feel free to overwrite if I've caused any factual mistakes or other issues.
 * In general I think another pass of copy editing is needed. There are awkward wordings in a number of places where I would prefer that more involved editors do the adjustments. Some examples:
 * "He was the youngest of his siblings." He isn't his own sibling.
 * "He was educated at The Lawrenceville School in New Jersey and graduated in 1911. Cooper graduated high school in 1911." Seems redundant.
 * "He only stayed there for 6 months because, after branching into the world of journalism, he went on to work at the Des Moines Register-Leader as well as the St. Louis Post-Dispatch." The word "because" implies some sort of reason will be given for his departure, but really it is just a chronology.
 * "He was helped by German soldiers and was taken to a prisoner reserve hospital." The word "helped" seems odd here -- he was captured, yes?
 * The Polish-Soviet war is mentioned twice in the same section in a way that seems redundant.
 * "Cooper discussed the plans for Pan American Airways with John Hambleton, which was formed during 1927." The dependent clause seems to be misplaced, assuming it was the airline that was formed rather than Hambleton.
 * The Searchers was from C.V. Whitney Pictures, but is discussed in the paragraph about Argosy Pictures. Also, C.V. Whitney Pictures is named after Cornelius Vanderbilt Whitney, so not clear how Cooper "form[ed]" it.
 * Lead is a little short, but technically within the guideline.

There are some sources used that do not meet the desired standards of reliability:
 * Filmreference.com (see Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 93 and WikiProject Film/Resources)
 * IMDB (see Citing IMDb)
 * TVTropes (see Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 211)

Of the five images used, three seem fine, but two have concerns:
 * File:Merian Cooper.jpg is tagged with the claim that it is public domain under the "life of the author plus 70 years" rule, but there is no source and no indication of who the photographer was. Also, the public domain rules are not the same in every country; it needs an explanation of how it is free use in the United States, where Wikipedia's servers are based.
 * File:Cooper Fauntleroy.jpg has tags claiming both European and US copyright expiration, but again no source or other information to substantiate publication date, which is needed if those tags are to be considered plausible.

I'm assuming all the above could be addressed within a seven-day hold period, but let me know if you think that will be a problem. --RL0919 (talk) 16:13, 13 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the review! I'll be reworking the page this week with my student. So far we've replaced the unreliable sources and started on copyediting. I was able to find File:Merian Cooper.jpg in our Cooper collection. I added more information to the image on the commons and updated its copyright tag. I'm still on the hunt for the Fauntleroy photo. I'll post again when I think we're done with the revisions. Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 22:06, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm going over your review again and I'm not sure what to do with Cooper's filmography. The style of the table is good (David Lynch's filmography has a similar style). I think it's too short for its own page; do you think it should be removed entirely? Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 18:03, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't think I made any comments about the Filmography section. If you think the items mentioned above have been addressed, I can re-look at the article and let you know where we stand. --RL0919 (talk) 18:07, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
 * You didn't comment on it, but you did mention it parenthetically in the check/fail section. I think maybe the section should later in the article, since you mentioned the page's layout should be checked too. It's not quite ready yet for re-review, but it should be in a few hours. Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 18:12, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I think you may be mis-reading the pass/fail template. The pass/fail icons appear after the specific GA criteria. The "fail" items were "prose, spelling, and grammar", "citations to reliable sources", and "images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales". I don't think you need to do anything to the Filmography for GA. --RL0919 (talk) 18:24, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh, yes, you're absolutely right. I should have looked more closely. I took out the Fauntleroy photo and I replaced it with one from our collection here in the Harold B. Lee library. I think I've addressed the prose concerns. I agree with you about the lead and I'll have one of my students expand it today.Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 19:42, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
 * The page is ready for you to look at again.Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 16:15, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

I moved one sentence; the issues from before appear to be addressed and no significant new issues were created in the process, so congratulations to you and your student on your new GA. --RL0919 (talk) 17:25, 21 November 2016 (UTC)