Talk:Victor Newman/GA1

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

Reviewer: BrickHouse337 (talk · contribs) 20:56, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Lead

 * "The character is widely described as a ruthless character..." Overuse of the word "character". Perhaps change to "The character is widely described as ruthless".
 * No other issues here.
 * Done.  Creativity  97  21:13, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Casting and creation

 * No issues here.

Development

 * In "Characterization": "...while other publications have labeled him as a villain..." I find labeled isn't a good term to use; perhaps "described" or "wrote", etc.
 * "Fralic also described the character as being a "quixotic" character". Same as in lead; overuse of the word "character". Perhaps, "...described the character as being "quixotic".
 * I see nowhere in the article linked from citation no. 10 that it says Victor has "softened". Unless there's another source currently in use that says this, I suggest it be removed.
 * In "Relationships": "In 2003, Victor and Sharon shared a kiss, causing issues in her marriage to Nick; she left town to "find herself". I see that it says Sharon had previously been married to "both of Victor's sons". I'm assuming that Victor has two sons, and with that we know she was married to Nick? For these reasons, it could be confusing to a general reader, so I would suggest saying, "...causing issues in her marriage to Nicholas..." And further down where it mentions a Joshua Morrow quote, place link brackets around the name.
 * In "Departure and return": "...leading to former executive producer Maria Arena Bell writing both Victor and Nikki (Melody Thomas Scott) off the canvas." "Off the canvas" isn't a good term to use because it is potentially confusing to readers. I would suggest changing it to "...both Victor and Nikki out of the series."
 * Instead of "In another interview with Soap Opera Digest, the actor said...", perhaps say "...the actor commented thoroughly about his departure, saying:".
 * Instead of "Onscreen, Braeden exited November 2, 2009, and returned by January 15, 2010", perhaps say "...and made his return on January 15, 2010."
 * Fixed everything.  Creativity  97  21:13, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Legacy

 * Place "heartthrob" in wrap brackets ( – ) with Linktext|heartthrob.
 * No other issues here, seems pretty stable.
 * Done.  Creativity  97  21:13, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Final review

 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * In its current state, fairly well written. Considering this is a lengthy article, I would suggest a request be made with the Guild of CopyEditors to have it thoroughly copyedited. However, there is probably a time-consuming wait to have it copyedited, so it won't affect the review.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Looks good; all of the sources are reliable and verifiable; good job.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Pretty well covered as far as focus.
 * 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Overall, this article strikes me as GA material, and clearly a lot of work has been put into it over the past few months. However, my concerns above need to be addressed before continuing. Once they have, I'll return to pass/fail the article. Cheers, --Brick House 337 20:56, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Overall, this article strikes me as GA material, and clearly a lot of work has been put into it over the past few months. However, my concerns above need to be addressed before continuing. Once they have, I'll return to pass/fail the article. Cheers, --Brick House 337 20:56, 26 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much BrickHouse for being fast and prompt with your review. I've fixed all of the concerns.  Creativity  97  21:13, 26 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Apologies for the slight delay here, I gave the article one last look over, and it's looks good to go now. Pass --Brick House 337 14:43, 27 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much!  Creativity  97  14:49, 27 June 2013 (UTC)