Talk:Subway Sadie/GA1

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

Reviewer: Seabuckthorn (talk · contribs) 10:03, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Nominator:  Taylor Trescott  - my talk + my edits Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have my full review up shortly. -- Seabuckthorn   ♥  10:03, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, sounds good.  Taylor Trescott  - my talk + my edits 15:31, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

1: 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:

Check for WP:LEAD:


 * 1) Check for Correct Structure of Lead Section:  ✅
 * 2) Check for Citations (WP:LEADCITE):  ✅
 * 3) Check for Introductory text:  ✅
 * 4) * Check for Provide an accessible overview (MOS:INTRO): ✅
 * 5) ** Major Point 1: Plot "focuses on a relationship between New York salesgirl Sadie Hermann (played by Dorothy Mackaill) and Irish subway guard Herb McCarthy (played by Jack Mulhall)." (not a concise summary of the Plot section)
 * 6) ** Major Point 2: Production "Subway Sadie is a 1926 … the black-and-white film" & "The cast, … and distributed by First National Pictures" (summarised well in the lead)
 * 7) ** Major Point 3: Release and reception "the film had its premiere in New York … unclear if a print of Subway Sadie has survived." (not a concise summary of the Release and reception section)
 * 8) * Check for Relative emphasis: ✅
 * 9) ** Major Point 1: Plot "focuses on a relationship between New York salesgirl Sadie Hermann (played by Dorothy Mackaill) and Irish subway guard Herb McCarthy (played by Jack Mulhall)." (the lead does not give due weight as is given in the body)
 * 10) ** Major Point 2: Production "Subway Sadie is a 1926 … the black-and-white film" & "The cast, … and distributed by First National Pictures" (the lead gives due weight as is given in the body)
 * 11) ** Major Point 3: Release and reception "the film had its premiere in New York … unclear if a print of Subway Sadie has survived." (the lead does not give due weight as is given in the body)
 * 12) * Check for Opening paragraph (MOS:BEGIN): ✅
 * 13) ** Check for First sentence (WP:LEADSENTENCE): ✅
 * 14) *** Subway Sadie is a 1926 American comedy-drama film directed by Alfred Santell and produced by Al Rockett.
 * 15) ** Check for Format of the first sentence (MOS:BOLDTITLE): ✅
 * 16) ** Check for Proper names and titles: ✅
 * 17) ** Check for Abbreviations and synonyms (MOS:BOLDSYN): None
 * 18) ** Check for Foreign language (MOS:FORLANG): None
 * 19) ** Check for Pronunciation: None
 * 20) ** Check for Contextual links (MOS:CONTEXTLINK): ✅
 * 21) ** Check for Biographies: NA
 * 22) ** Check for Organisms: NA
 * 23) Check for Biographies of living persons:  NA
 * 24) Check for Alternative names (MOS:LEADALT):  ✅
 * 25) * Check for Non-English titles:
 * 26) * Check for Usage in first sentence:
 * 27) * Check for Separate section usage:
 * 28) Check for Length (WP:LEADLENGTH):  ✅
 * 29) * The lead should be expanded.
 * 30) Check for Clutter (WP:LEADCLUTTER):  None

✅

Check for WP:LAYOUT: ✅


 * 1) Check for Body sections: WP:BODY, MOS:BODY.  ✅
 * 2) * Check for Headings and sections: ✅
 * 3) * Check for Section templates and summary style: ✅
 * 4) * Check for Paragraphs (MOS:PARAGRAPHS): ✅
 * 5) Check for Standard appendices and footers (MOS:APPENDIX):  ✅
 * 6) * Check for Order of sections (WP:ORDER): ✅
 * 7) * Check for Works or publications: ✅
 * 8) * Check for See also section (MOS:SEEALSO): None
 * 9) * Check for Notes and references (WP:FNNR): ✅
 * 10) * Check for Further reading (WP:FURTHER): None
 * 11) * Check for External links (WP:LAYOUTEL): ✅
 * 12) ** Cross-checked with other GAs: Roads to Vegas, Gunslinger (1956 film), The Projected Man, How Brown Saw the Baseball Game, Last Clear Chance & The Bold Bank Robbery
 * 13) * Check for Links to sister projects: None
 * 14) * Check for Navigation templates: None
 * 15) Check for Formatting:  ✅
 * 16) * Check for Images (WP:LAYIM): ✅
 * 17) * Check for Links: ✅
 * 18) * Check for Horizontal rule (WP:LINE): ✅

✅

Check for WP:WTW: ✅


 * 1) Check for Words that may introduce bias:  ✅
 * 2) * Check for Puffery (WP:PEA): ✅
 * 3) * Check for Contentious labels (WP:LABEL): ✅
 * 4) * Check for Unsupported attributions (WP:WEASEL): ✅
 * 5) * Check for Expressions of doubt (WP:ALLEGED): ✅
 * 6) * Check for Editorializing (MOS:OPED): ✅
 * 7) * Check for Synonyms for said (WP:SAY): ✅
 * 8) ** Fix "In June 1927, a Southeast Missourian writer noted that …". What follows is his interpretation, so a verb like "assessed" or "opined".
 * 9) Check for Expressions that lack precision:  ✅
 * 10) * Check for Euphemisms (WP:EUPHEMISM): ✅
 * 11) * Check for Clichés and idioms (WP:IDIOM): ✅
 * 12) * Check for Relative time references (WP:REALTIME): ✅
 * 13) * Check for Neologisms (WP:PEA): None
 * 14) Check for Offensive material (WP:F***):  ✅

Check for WP:MOSFICT: ✅


 * 1) Check for Real-world perspective (WP:Real world):  ✅
 * 2) * Check for Primary and secondary information (WP:PASI): ✅
 * 3) * Check for Contextual presentation (MOS:PLOT): ✅

None


 * Prose is preferred over list (WP:PROSE):
 * Check for Tables (MOS:TABLES):

2: Verifiable with no original research
 * a. Has an appropriate reference section: Yes
 * b. Citation to reliable sources where necessary: excellent (Thorough check on Google. Cross-checked with other GAs)

✅

Check for WP:RS: ✅

Cross-checked with other GAs: Roads to Vegas, Gunslinger (1956 film), The Projected Man, How Brown Saw the Baseball Game, Last Clear Chance & The Bold Bank Robbery


 * 1) Check for the material (WP:RSVETTING):  (not contentious) ✅
 * 2) * Is it contentious?: No
 * 3) * Does the ref indeed support the material?:
 * 4) Check for the author (WP:RSVETTING):  ✅
 * 5) * Who is the author?:
 * 6) ** (Turner Classic Movies)
 * 7) ** (National Board of Review)
 * 8) ** (American Film Institute)
 * 9) ** (British Film Institute)
 * 10) ** (Variety)
 * 11) ** (Ottawa Citizen)
 * 12) ** (Lockport Union-Sun & Journal)
 * 13) ** (Silent Era)
 * 14) ** Koszarski, Richard (Rutgers University Press)
 * 15) ** (The Miami News)
 * 16) ** (St. Petersburg Times)
 * 17) ** (The New York Times)
 * 18) ** (Evening Independent)
 * 19) ** (Photoplay)
 * 20) ** (Moving Picture Herald)
 * 21) ** (Berkeley Daily Gazette)
 * 22) ** (The Film Daily)
 * 23) ** (The Educational Screen)
 * 24) ** (Reading Eagle)
 * 25) ** (The Southeast Missourian)
 * 26) ** (The St. Petersburg Times)
 * 27) * Does the author have a Wikipedia article?:
 * 28) * What are the author's academic credentials and professional experience?:
 * 29) * What else has the author published?:
 * 30) * Is the author, or this work, cited in other reliable sources? In academic works?:
 * 31) Check for the publication (WP:RSVETTING):  ✅
 * 32) * Turner Classic Movies
 * 33) * National Board of Review
 * 34) * American Film Institute
 * 35) * British Film Institute
 * 36) * Variety
 * 37) * Ottawa Citizen
 * 38) * Lockport Union-Sun & Journal
 * 39) * Silent Era
 * 40) * Rutgers University Press
 * 41) * The Miami News
 * 42) * St. Petersburg Times
 * 43) * The New York Times
 * 44) * Evening Independent
 * 45) * Photoplay
 * 46) * Moving Picture Herald
 * 47) * Berkeley Daily Gazette
 * 48) * The Film Daily
 * 49) * The Educational Screen
 * 50) * Reading Eagle
 * 51) * The Southeast Missourian
 * 52) * The St. Petersburg Times
 * 53) Check for Self-published sources (WP:SPS):

✅

Check for inline citations WP:MINREF: ✅


 * 1) Check for Direct quotations:  ✅
 * 2) * "practically an entire day" in order to observe them.[6]
 * 3) * "every girl in America." She believed that "there is not a situation in this picture which could not happen to any girl. That is one of the things I like about it. There is nothing in it that could not be true."[7]
 * 4) * "an amusing photoplay". … "nevertheless pleasing".[13]
 * 5) * "one of the cleverest and most interesting pictures that has been here this season".[14]
 * 6) * "splendid" and the film was "a true and human story".[15]
 * 7) * "a nice little feature, nothing big, but will go over on bargain nights" … .[16]
 * 8) * "sheer brilliance rarely has been equalled" … .[17]
 * 9) * "delight the majority of straphangers" … "it is what the boys call excellent box-office". … "a light but charming comedy". … "a consistently decent affair" … .[18] (Random check on source 18, successful, "A picture that will delight the majority of straphangers, and that is covering a pretty large territory. It is what the boys call excellent box-office. – Morning Telegraph")
 * 10) * "pretty trite stuff".[19]
 * 11) * "a stellar combination."[20]
 * 12) * "very successful".[21]
 * 13) Check for Likely to be challenged:  ✅
 * 14) Check for Contentious material about living persons (WP:BLP):  NA


 * c. No original research: ✅

✅


 * 1) Check for primary sources (WP:PRIMARY):  ✅
 * 2) Check for synthesis (WP:SYN):  ✅
 * 3) Check for original images (WP:OI):  ✅

3: Broad in its coverage

✅

Thorough check in parallel with criteria 2. Cross-checked with other GAs: Roads to Vegas, Gunslinger (1956 film), The Projected Man, How Brown Saw the Baseball Game, Last Clear Chance & The Bold Bank Robbery


 * 1) Check for Article scope as defined by reliable sources:
 * 2) Check for The extent of the subject matter in these RS:
 * 3) Check for Out of scope:
 * 4) Check for The range of material that belongs in the article:
 * 5) Check for All material that is notable is covered:
 * 6) Check for All material that is referenced is covered:
 * 7) Check for All material that a reader would be likely to agree matches the specified scope is covered:
 * 8) Check for The most general scope that summarises essentially all knowledge:
 * 9) Check for Stay on topic and no wandering off-topic (WP:OFFTOPIC):

✅


 * 1) Check for Readability issues (WP:LENGTH):
 * 2) Check for Article size (WP:TOO LONG!):

4: Neutral

✅

4. Fair representation without bias: ✅


 * 1) Check for POV (WP:YESPOV):  ✅
 * 2) Check for naming (WP:POVNAMING):  ✅
 * 3) Check for structure (WP:STRUCTURE):  ✅
 * 4) Check for Due and undue weight (WP:DUE):  ✅
 * 5) Check for Balancing aspects (WP:BALASPS):  ✅
 * 6) Check for Giving "equal validity" (WP:VALID):  ✅
 * 7) Check for Balance (WP:YESPOV):  ✅
 * 8) Check for Impartial tone (WP:IMPARTIAL):  ✅
 * 9) Check for Describing aesthetic opinions (WP:SUBJECTIVE):  ✅
 * 10) Check for Words to watch (WP:YESPOV):  ✅
 * 11) Check for Attributing and specifying biased statements (WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV):  ✅
 * 12) Check for Fringe theories and pseudoscience (WP:PSCI):  None
 * 13) Check for Religion (WP:RNPOV):  None

5: Stable: No edit wars, etc: Yes

6: Images ✅ (NFC with a valid FUR) & (PD)

✅

6: Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: ✅


 * 1) Check for copyright tags (WP:TAGS):  ✅
 * 2) * Image 1 (Subway Sadie poster.jpg): This image is of a poster, and the copyright for it is most likely owned by either the publisher or the creator of the work depicted. It is believed that the use of scaled-down, low-resolution images of posters (1) to provide critical commentary on the film, event, etc. in question or of the poster itself, not solely for illustration and (2) on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law. Other use of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, might be copyright infringement.
 * 3) * Image 2 (Dorothy MacKaill Stars of the Photoplay.jpg): This work is in the public domain because it was published in the United States between 1923 and 1963 and although there may or may not have been a copyright notice, the copyright was not renewed. Unless its author has been dead for the required period, it is copyrighted in the countries or areas that do not apply the rule of the shorter term for US works, such as Canada (50 pma), Mainland China (50 pma, not Hong Kong or Macao), Germany (70 pma), Mexico (100 pma), Switzerland (70 pma), and other countries with individual treaties.
 * 4) * Image 3 (Jack Mulhall - Jul 1920 MP.jpg): This media file is in the public domain in the United States. This applies to U.S. works where the copyright has expired, often because its first publication occurred prior to January 1, 1923. See this page for further explanation.
 * 5) * Image 4 (Subway Sadie promo still.png): This media file is in the public domain in the United States. This applies to U.S. works where the copyright has expired, often because its first publication occurred prior to January 1, 1923. See this page for further explanation.
 * 6) Check for copyright status:  ✅
 * 7) * Image 1 (Subway Sadie poster.jpg) (Non-free content)
 * 8) * Image 2 (Dorothy MacKaill Stars of the Photoplay.jpg) (PD)
 * 9) * Image 3 (Jack Mulhall - Jul 1920 MP.jpg) (PD)
 * 10) * Image 4 (Subway Sadie promo still.png) (PD)
 * 11) Check for non-free content (WP:NFC):  ✅ (Yes)
 * 12) Check for valid fair use rationales (WP:FUR):  ✅ (valid)
 * 13) * Source (WP:NFCC): http://www.mikeclinesthenplaying.com/2011/10/june-1927-movie-listings.html (Movie Poster for the film Subway Sadie)
 * 14) * Use in article (WP:NFCC): Subway Sadie
 * 15) * Purpose of use in article (WP:NFCC): Main infobox. The image is used for identification in the context of critical commentary of the work, product or service for which it serves as poster art. It makes a significant contribution to the user's understanding of the article, which could not practically be conveyed by words alone.The image is placed in the infobox at the top of the article discussing the work, to show the primary visual image associated with the work, and to help the user quickly identify the work product or service and know they have found what they are looking for.Use for this purpose does not compete with the purposes of the original artwork, namely the creator providing graphic design services, and in turn the marketing of the promoted item.
 * 16) * Replaceable? (WP:NFCC): As film poster art, the image is not replaceable by free content; any other image that shows the same artwork or poster would also be copyrighted, and any version that is not true to the original would be inadequate for identification or commentary. (Since it's copyrighted, there are no free alternatives available.)
 * 17) * Minimal use (WP:NFCC): Low resolution: The copy is of sufficient resolution for commentary and identification but lower resolution than the original poster. Copies made from it will be of inferior quality, unsuitable as counterfeit artwork, pirate versions or for uses that would compete with the commercial purpose of the original artwork.

6: Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: ✅


 * 1) Check for image relevance (WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE):  ✅
 * 2) * Image 1 (Subway Sadie poster.jpg): Relevant to the article
 * 3) * Image 2 (Dorothy MacKaill Stars of the Photoplay.jpg): Relevant to the article
 * 4) * Image 3 (Jack Mulhall - Jul 1920 MP.jpg): Relevant to the article
 * 5) * Image 4 (Subway Sadie promo still.png): Relevant to the article
 * 6) Check for Images for the lead (WP:LEADIMAGE):  ✅
 * 7) * Image 1 (Subway Sadie poster.jpg): Appropriate & Representative
 * 8) Check for suitable captions (WP:CAPTION):  ✅
 * 9) * Caption 1 - "Lobby card" (succinct and informative)
 * 10) * Caption 2 - "Promotional stills of Dorothy Mackaill and Jack Mulhall, who both had lead roles in Subway Sadie" (can be more succinct)
 * 11) ** I recommend the following revision: "The lead actors Dorothy Mackaill and Jack Mulhall in promotional stills" (The incorporated version is good)
 * 12) * Caption 3 - "A promotional still for the film featuring Dorothy Mackaill" (can be more succinct)
 * 13) ** I recommend the following revision: "Dorothy Mackaill in a promotional still" (Not incorporated, I'll pass the existing version.)

As per the above checklist, the issues identified are :
 * The lead does not provide an accessible overview and does not give relative emphasis.
 * The lead should be expanded.
 * Fix "In June 1927, a Southeast Missourian writer noted that …". What follows is the writer's interpretation, so a verb like "assessed" or "opined".
 * Captions can be more succinct.

This article is a very promising GA nominee. I’m glad to see your work here. I’m putting the article on hold. All the best, -- Seabuckthorn   ♥  03:08, 19 January 2014 (UTC)


 * OK,, I believe I have addressed all issues.  Taylor Trescott  - my talk + my edits 18:44, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

OK, everything looks good now. Passing the article to GA status. -- Seabuckthorn   ♥  23:21, 19 January 2014 (UTC)