Talk:Steve Dodd/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 13:18, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Ref #5 doesn't mention Steve Dodd at all; Ref #17 doesn't mention Steve Dodd. All other online references check out.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * It would be good to see a little more about his appearnaces in the later films, including the Matrix. There is nothing of his life outside of TV/Films.  Is it not possible to get his assumed Dob from the military records?
 * 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, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * On hold for seven days fopr above issues to be addressed. Please comment here.  I have watchlisted this page. Jezhotwells (talk) 13:44, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I am happy with improvemnets that have been made which mean that in my opinion the article meets Good article status. One small point - it might be better to crop out the left hand side of the picture of Dodd, but this is not neccessary for GA status. Thanks for your hard work on a notable Austrailan actor. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:12, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * On hold for seven days fopr above issues to be addressed. Please comment here.  I have watchlisted this page. Jezhotwells (talk) 13:44, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I am happy with improvemnets that have been made which mean that in my opinion the article meets Good article status. One small point - it might be better to crop out the left hand side of the picture of Dodd, but this is not neccessary for GA status. Thanks for your hard work on a notable Austrailan actor. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:12, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Responses
Thanks for the review.
 * You are correct that Dodd is not mentioned in ref 5 - it is a ref being provided for the fact that Rafferty was the star of Kangaroo, whereas ref 1 (see the filmography) is the ref that says that Dodd has a role in Kangaroo. Ok
 * You are correct that Dodd is not mentioned in ref 17 - it is a ref being provided for the fact that Overlanders was made in 1946. This is an important fact in establishing the chronological range of Dodd's career . Hang on, there's a problem - the hyperlink at ref 17 links to the wrong info at the NFSA. Something's happened here. Let me get back to you. hamiltonstone (talk) 22:29, 9 November 2009 (UTC) You were right about reference 17. It had been intended to provide a date for overlanders, but there was a problem with the linking at the National Film and Sound Archive. In any case, i have replaced it with a moe stable reference - number 5 in fact! hamiltonstone (talk) 22:43, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Regarding his more recent career: i will go back over the sources identified, but i don't think anything more has been written. Dodd is notable for the length of his career and some of his parts, but in general he is a minor character in any particular film, and thus is generally not mentioned in reviews etc.
 * OK, I understand
 * Regarding his life outside film and TV: you mention getting a DOB from military records. That may be possible, but i don't even know if the relevant records are in the public domain, let alone where they might be found. His agent's site indicates the age of character he is suitable to play and, of course, we know he appeared in a film in 1946, but I've no other info on such matters. This information might be considered necessary at FA, but given that it is not in any of the fairly extensive sources that i've located, i'm hoping it is not a barrier to GA.
 * Yes, that was just a suggestion. I have found a photograph which appears to be PD at.
 * Genius! I'm impressed. Have uploaded it at commons and included it in the article. Anything else? hamiltonstone (talk) 23:08, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * On an unrelated point: do you have a view about the format and referencing of the filmography?
 * I haven't seen a filmography exactly like that but don't see that there is anything wrong with it. Well laid out, summarizes the information.
 * I am checking a book folder of material at the National Library today. If info isn't there, it probably isn't anywhere. I'll leave a post once that's done. regards, hamiltonstone (talk) 22:43, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Update

 * Thanks Jez, your feedback pushed me to get some 1970s newspaper articles from the National Library. That has hopefully exhausted the likely sources. They gave me quite a lot of new detail - though not the particular items you had been looking for. See what you think. hamiltonstone (talk) 03:09, 10 November 2009 (UTC)