Talk:Pride and Prejudice (1995 TV series)/GA1

GA on Hold
This review is transcluded from Talk:Pride and Prejudice (1995 TV serial)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Pride and Prejudice (1995 TV serial) is extremely close to becoming a good article. There's just one thing: The Cast section confuses me. Should n't it be a sub-section under production? Please do so; a "Cast" sectin should be listed somewhat like this: This is NOT personal preference; GA articles and FA articles alike write their cast sections like this, and I believe this article should be the same. I will leave one week for someone to complete this task, untill then,  Limetolime  I want an award! • look what I did! 02:47, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Jennifer Ehle as Elizabeth Bennet, The second of the Bennet daughters at twenty years old, she is portrayed as intelligent, lively, attractive and witty, with her faults being a tendency to judge on first impressions and to mock people excessively.
 * Yeah, the cast section is the weakest spot of the article, which is because I deliberately haven't paid it any attention. I didn't expect the GA review to happen for at least another two weeks (backlog experience and because I had left a note at WP:GAC), but I'll fix/expand this section over the next few days. There are two reasons why I may not transform the prose in the cast section into a list in the end:
 * In my experience (which may be different from yours), they prefer prose over lists at FAC (I don't yet know whether FA status is really my goal).
 * There are just tons of equally important characters in the story (and therefore many actors), and Pride and Prejudice already gives a summary of each character.
 * I have no patent solution for this (both prose and list format have massive downsides per above), so this is likely going to take me five days rather than five hours to fix. (But I will have come up with a reasonable solution by the end of the week). Thank you for your time so far. – sgeureka t•c 06:23, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I have rearranged and copyeditted the cast section now to what I believe will mostly stick. Besides the introduction paragraph that gives general information about the cast and casting, there is one paragraph for the two leads, then all characters of the Bennet storyline, and finally a paragraph for the characters on Darcy's storyline. I have also added a (collapsed) table for the geneology, and the link to Pride and Prejudice is still there if readers want to have more detail about the characters' role in the story (plus, there is always the Plot section). Barring further copyedits and expansion in the next few weeks to get the article to FA quality, I am mostly comfortable with the article in its current state and layout now. – sgeureka t•c 07:58, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I've finished fine-tuning the cast section, and fixed some other left-over issues. I'll leave the next expansion session (about stylistic theme choices) for whenever the GA review is over. Thank you. – sgeureka t•c 16:04, 11 June 2008 (UTC)