Talk:Snow Prince/GA1

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

Reviewer: SilkTork (talk · contribs) 14:39, 17 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Pass.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  11:12, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Tick list
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 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:

Comments

 * Pass
 * Images have fair use rationales.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  16:55, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Stable. No edit wars.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  16:55, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * There is an appropriate reference section.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  16:56, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Focus. There are no excessively detailed sections.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  18:10, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Neutral. Article is fair and balanced.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  18:11, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Prose is now acceptable.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  11:02, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Coverage is broad enough, following the format and content of other audited film articles.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  11:02, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Sourcing. Google translate may be crude, but it provides enough evidence to support what is said in the article.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  11:07, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Query
 * Major aspects . The film is an adaptation of A Dog of Flanders. It might be useful to have some information in the article about the book.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  18:09, 17 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Fail
 * Prose. I have copy-edited the lead for obvious mistakes, but what remains is still a bit awkward. The article contains basic errors, and the prose lacks sophistication in places resulting in awkward reading. The phrasing obscures the meaning rather than delivering it clearly. Example - "An elderly woman, Sayo Arima, receives an unexpected package containing a manuscript. It was left by an old man, who says that it was written by his father Haigo. As Sayo reads it, she recalls events related to the special friendship that she shared with a poor village boy named Sota." Could be better presented as "Sayo Arima, an elderly woman, unexpectedly receives a manuscript written by Haigo, the circus clown. The manuscript deals with events seventy years earlier when Sayo Arima was friends with Sota, a poor village boy." The article needs a decent copy-edit - at the moment it reads like an awkward translation.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  17:40, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I am trying to tidy up the prose, but it's not easy as I don't know the film. It appears that the film goes into a flashback, but it's not easy to pick up what is story and what is scene setting. Based on the information given in the article, it wouldn't be possible for someone to do an appropriate job of copy-editing. There would need to be a decent source to use, or the film itself.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  17:51, 17 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Lead. To meet GA criteria 1(b), which relates to specific manual of style guidelines, the article needs to comply with the advice in WP:LEAD. That is, in addition to being an introduction, the lead needs to be an adequate overview of the whole of the article. As a rough guide, each major section in the article should be represented with an appropriate summary in the lead. Also, the article should provide further details on all the things mentioned in the lead. And, the first few sentences should mention the most notable features of the article's subject - the essential facts that every reader should know.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  17:55, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Hold
I'll need some time to check out sources. A lot of sources are in Japanese which makes things a little awkward, but Google Translate will provide some help. In the meantime, the two areas that need attention are prose and the lead. Most GANs need to have work done on the lead, so that is quite normal. And prose often needs a brush up. If there isn't much that needs doing with the prose I'll generally do it myself as that is quicker and easier than writing it out in the review. In this case there is the problem that in order to write up the Plot section properly, one needs to have a knowledge of the plot, so I can't do much with that alone - but we can work together on it if need be. I'll put this on hold for an initial seven days to allow work to get started on building the lead, and brushing up the Plot section.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  18:21, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Responses
(Moved from User talk:SilkTork)

Thanks for reviewing this article! Since this is my first GA nomination, I might need quite a lot of guidance from you, so thanks for the help in advance. I have added more information to the lead, but I feel that the paragraph I added does not flow really well. Can you have a look at it? I still have two other queries:

The problem in the Plot section you mentioned has been bugging me since the article was Start-class. However, despite many attempts by three other editors and myself, it is still not up to standard. Therefore, I would definitely need your expertise in this area. Can you highlight to me the sentences/paragraphs that needs working on (and mention what is wrong with them, if possible), so that I can try to redo these with your help? And if you have any queries about the plot, I will be happy to answer them (Sadly, any external writeup of this film's plot does not exist anymore, so I can't show you any).

Lastly, you mentioned about adding the book's information. Can you specify which area is lacking (eg:plot/history/background info) so that I can work on it? Thank you and I look forward to working with you. Apologizes if my English is not really perfect. Happy editing!--Lionratz (talk) 09:44, 18 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I am prepared to offer some help, though it has to be understood that GAN is not a writing aid, it is a review of an article that is felt to meet GA criteria, so there is an assumption the article is already quite good. I support the GA project as it does improve articles, and my main aim in doing GA reviews is to assist articles to meet GA criteria. Time, motivation and ability will always vary, and if the article requires a lot of assistance from me which is not possible for me to complete in a reasonable space of time I am likely to fail the article and suggest that the required work is completed at leisure and the article renominated. This is not a problem as a fail is not permanent, and articles can be renominated quite easily.
 * I note that work has been done; though some of those edits have introduced errors into the article. A full stop has been introduced, producing this: "a 2009 Japanese film. adapted from the novel". And this sentence: "Sayo Arima, an elderly woman, unexpectedly receives a manuscript written by Haigo, the circus clown" has been changed into: "An elderly Sayo Arima unexpectedly receives a manuscript from Haigo's son". In the original sentence two characters are introduced: "Sayo Arima" - "an elderly woman"; and "Haigo" - "the circus clown"; this has been altered into an assumption that the reader knows who the characters are, so they are not explained or introduced - "An elderly Sayo Arima" (what or who is that?) and "Haigo's son" (who is Haigo?).
 * I'll extend the hold into the New Year, and see what I can do to help. Though, as I said above, I will need to have access to a good English translation of the plot, or have the plot explained on this review page. Without that, I cannot do appropriate work on the plot section. If you are not able to provide the required plot information, and you feel you are not able to improve the prose yourself, then please let me know. We can try asking around for assistance. If none is forthcoming, then the GAN will need to be closed. But we'll have a go at improving the article first.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  12:11, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I have fixed the new problems (hopefully) that you mentioned. As for the plot section, can you highlight problematic sentences so that I can think of ways to rephrase them? And as for translated versions of the plot, the most complete I can find is this one. Additionally, you can find the film's English-subbed trailer at Nippon Cinema. Thanks for the help, I really appreciate it.--Lionratz (talk) 11:17, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Pass
This is a useful and informative article on what appears to be a pleasant film. The lead still needs some work, though it does just about cover all the main points in the article so it meets GA criteria.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  11:12, 5 January 2012 (UTC)