Talk:Neptune (Alexander McQueen collection)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Trainsandotherthings (talk · contribs) 02:07, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I will be reviewing this article soon(TM). Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:07, 27 April 2023 (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:
 * I have a few nitpicks, but I don't believe any will hold this back from an immediate pass. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:29, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * I wasn't able to identify any issues with this criterion, the article is well written and follows policy. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:29, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 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:
 * Referencing format looks good. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:04, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 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:
 * Sourced from reliable news organizations and published books about McQueen, no unreliable sources are included. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:04, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * C. It contains no original research:
 * Source review did not find any issues. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:29, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
 * No issues identified in source review, and Earwig only pulled up attributed quotes. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:29, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
 * We have background, the show, its reception, and its legacy. All the key aspects are covered. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:04, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
 * Generally follows summary style, article is concise and doesn't go off topic. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:04, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * No concerns about neutrality, article remains objective throughout, and opinions are attributed. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:04, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * Article history is stable, with no evidence of disputes or other issues. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:04, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * One fair use image, with all of the required information filled out on the fair use rationale. Other images are properly licensed. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:04, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * Two images are missing alt text, otherwise good. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:04, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * While I had a few nitpicks about prose (and two images need alt text), which you may wish to review or incorporate, they are so minor that I am going to pass the article now rather than place it on hold, as I trust you will take care of the minor issues I brought up. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:29, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Prose comments
 * No short description.
 * Fixed
 * "1980s fashion, and the work of designers and artists influential in the 1980s" Isn't this kind of saying the same thing twice?
 * Tweaked


 * "In his pre-show statement, McQueen said "I'm bringing sex back to the market. Women want to be excited again," then said it was a transitional collection, as he was "trying to find my niche. What do I do best? Sexy tailoring, sexy clothes."" Consider breaking this up into two sentences.
 * Done

Source review
 * "Two main phases of looks were presented, with 56 looks total: the first half comprised monochrome black ensembles with white, silver, and grey accents and a focus on tailoring, while the second half involved outfits in a palette of white, green, and gold with a draped "Greek goddess" look." Also consider breaking up this sentence into two sentences. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:04, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I've completed a basic source review with spot checks. I checked references 16 (Jess Cartner-Morley), 4 (Rajini Vaidyanathan), and 9 (Women's Wear Daily). Everything I checked was consistent with the sources, and I did not see any issues with copying or close paraphrasing. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:29, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Cheers, thanks for the review. Comments above, and alt text, addressed. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 16:15, 27 April 2023 (UTC)