Talk:Nitehawk Cinema/GA1

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

Reviewer: You've gone incognito (talk · contribs) 05:35, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Will be taking this,. The article looks exemplary at first glance, but we shall see if it meets GA standards.  You've gone incognito  (talk &sdot; contribs) 05:35, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
 * First round of edits have been made. Morgan695 (talk) 17:22, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
 * 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 located in a an historic Art Deco movie theater.": 2. "Nitehawk Williamsburg is housed in a former industrial building renovated by Caliper Architecture, which and was retrofitted to also include a nine-unit apartment building and a custom façade made from LED lights, zinc, and glass"; 3. The following partial quotes must have their terminal punctuations (periods) moved outside, per MOS:LQ: "at a cost of 'less than $10 million' and "the granddaddy of swizzle-stick cinema in the city"; 4. " While Nitehawk Initially focused on screening first-run films, it Nitehawk shifted focus in 2012 to incorporate a range of first-run, classic, art house, and cult films"; 5. Olivia Colman's comedy comedic work; 6. Change "e.g." to "for example/instance"; 7. Drop "among numerous others" as the word "including" already implies this; 8. "writ large" sounds quite archaic for encyclopedic writing. 9. "proliferation of licensed and dine-in theaters" -> you mean "liquor licensed dine-in theaters" don't you? 10. Include "the" in The New York Times
 * Edits have been made.


 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * I might not be able to check some texts against this criterion as several sources from NYT require subscriptions. Assuming good faith seems like a cop-out, so I would really appreciate it if you provide the archived versions of these refs' complete texts.
 * Boutique Cinemas Offer More than Popcorn and Snacks, Nitehawk to Open a Second Cinema in Brooklyn, Bringing a New Nitehawk to a Tattered Art Deco Cinema, Nitehawk Prospect Park Is Finally Ready, Promising Art-House Movies (and Cleaner Floors), A Movie on the Cheap, Perhaps in Filipino, With Dinner and a Drink, Now Playing: The Movies Before the Movies

Sorry it has taken me three days to respond. Let's continue shall we?
 * Repeat ref 13 to the sentence "It is located in an historic Art Deco movie theater adjacent to Prospect Park that operated as The Sanders from 1928 to 1978" to support the Art Deco claim.
 * Better remove repeated ref 3 in the second sentence of the Influence section as ref 27 supports this already. Also, the three locations of the Alamo Drafthouse is not in source given; I only count one, which is located in Downtown Brooklyn, as stated in refs 3 and 27
 * Ref 2 needs subscription, give me the archived complete version here
 * Ref 15 has incorrect year inline, says 2016
 * Ref 20 only says "retro films" (or classic films), not "first-run, classic, art house, and cult films"
 * Ref 21 doesn't support the sentence "Nitehawk holds several regular series of special screenings and midnight movies" (could be wrong, tho)
 * Ref 22 doesn't support grindhouse at "The Deuce (grindhouse)" claim
 * Ref 23 doesn't support content I struck: "Anime After Dark" (anime films screened in partnership with Anime NYC )" I suggest getting rid of it.
 * Movie theater should be "independent movie theater" and wikilink should link to the independent movie theater article in the sentence "Nitehawk has been cited as a movie theater that has achieved financial success amid declining ticket sales for the industry overall," per the source.  You've gone incognito  (talk &sdot; contribs) 12:33, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Edits have been made. For Ref 21 doesn't support the sentence "Nitehawk holds several regular series of special screenings and midnight movies", I have removed the citation entirely because the subsequent list of cited film series supports this claim. I will provide text of the WSJ article later this evening. Morgan695 (talk) 14:54, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Just to update, I no longer have access to the WSJ article and it doesn't appear to be archived on WayBackMachine, but it appears to be un-paywalled on mobile, if you have access to a smartphone; I've also copy and pasted the article text here for reference. Morgan695 (talk) 16:03, 30 October 2019 (UTC)


 * 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):
 * Although no complaints here, please use Template:logo fur as rationale for the logo
 * Edit has been made.
 * ❌ Add the URL from where you got the logo and put it in the source parameter of the logo's page
 * Sorry, fixed now.
 * Edit has been made.
 * ❌ Add the URL from where you got the logo and put it in the source parameter of the logo's page
 * Sorry, fixed now.

I'm happy with the changes brought about, though I did some of them myself (see article's edit history). I'm happy to announce that the article has passed the Good Article standard; it's well written and sourced, broad, unbiased, and verified. Good work.  You've gone incognito  (talk &sdot; contribs) 05:07, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: