Talk:Shoot 'Em Up (film)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Ssven2 (talk · contribs) 08:26, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

I will review this article. Thank you. — Ssven2  Looking at you, kid 08:26, 17 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Wikilink "drifter" to the correct link for those who may not be aware of its meaning.
 * "enlisting the help of prostitute DQ" — "enlisting the help of a prostitute Donna Quintano".
 * "At a bus stop in a rough part of town," — Name of town? and also the "rough part"? (At least clarify why the name is not given in the film if it isn't mentioned in it)
 * Neither is revealed, unfortunately. However, it's unlikely not in an American town considering this movie had been shot in Canada as you may have read already.


 * What do you mean by "lactating prostitute"? Just prostitute would suffice anyhow.
 * Apart from having sex with her customers, she also breastfeed them. The villain, though, has referred to her as a wet nurse at one point, but I have deleted "lactating" per your concern.
 * Ooh, kinky. Mama. ;-)


 * "Smith takes Rutledge hostage; Hertz and Hammerson to appear." — Doesn't quite make sense here. Do clarify and tweak the sentence. give it a copyedit if you believe the text could be tightened
 * "live rounds" is informal. Any other formal word like "bullets"/"bombs"?
 * "took place in Toronto and took fifty-five days" — write this as "took place in Toronto and lasted for fifty-five days" to avoid repetition of "took".
 * Try expanding the reception section and describe the critics' opinion of the performances of the cast and the technical aspects.
 * Wikilink Variety in reference number 25.

Good work on the article, Slightlymad. Address these comments and the article is promoted. — Ssven2  Looking at you, kid 09:26, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * B. Citation to 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 tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall: Passed, my queries were met and solved by the nominator.
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall: Passed, my queries were met and solved by the nominator.
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall: Passed, my queries were met and solved by the nominator.
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

Great job, Slightlymad. Keep up the good work. — Ssven2  Looking at you, kid 11:54, 17 January 2018 (UTC)