Talk:Will Munro/GA1

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

Reviewer: DustFormsWords (talk) 22:10, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I have conducted a (long-overdue) Good Article Review of this article. You should now feel free to respond to the review below - DustFormsWords (talk) 22:10, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

 :
 * (a) ; [[Image:Green tick.svg|16px]]
 * This article meets the requirements for Good Article criterion 1(a). Can I suggest the following improvement, though:
 * Look at the direct quotes in the article and carefully consider whether the quote adds something to a reader's understanding of the article that could not be gained by summarising the quote in simpler English. "Hyperlibidinous environment where everyone became a performer" in the lead section, for example, is a particularly opaque turn of phrase, and reduces readability without adding much clarity in return.  You could simply have this sentence read "The party was known for bringing a diverse crowd, and at is peak brought..."  Other quotes in the article have a similar problem (florid phrasing that adds little encyclopaedic depth).  Quotes should add to the article, not merely be an interesting phrase.
 * (b) . [[Image:Green tick.svg|16px]]
 * Done - Article now complies with the MOS for lead sections. (I have made some tweaks to the opening sentence myself but if you don't like them please revert; your new phrasing was fine for satisfying the GA criteria.)
 * There are (small) problems with the article's compliance with the manual of style for lead sections:
 * It's undesirable to have a direct quote in the very first sentence of the article, except where the quote itself (or the general public opinion represented by the quote) is the most notable thing about the article topic. Munro's notability should be able to be explained in simple English in the lead, and then (if necessary) elaborated on with quoted text in the article body.  That is to say, you should be able to explain why Munro is notable without quoting, and that explanation should be the article's first sentence.
 * Done - Article now complies with the MOS for layout.
 * There are problems with the article's compliance with the manual of style for layout:
 * Section headers containing only a single sentence are undesirable. Rearrange the article to remove this problem.  You might want to consider merging "early life", "personal life" and "illness and death" into a single section called "personal life".
 * The article complies with the manual of style for words to watch, and the manuals of style for fiction and list incorporation do not apply to this article.

:
 * (a) ; [[Image:Green tick.svg|16px]]
 * All references appear in the section "References".
 * (b) ; [[Image:Green tick.svg|16px]]
 * Done - Article now provides inline citations to reliable sources for all facts requiring citation.
 * All sources used appear to be reliable, but you are missing citations for the following facts. These are arguably not facts required to be cited for the purposes of Good Article, but consider me to be challenging them, and thereby requiring citations:
 * In "club promoter and community builder", the following sentence: "It began in the downstairs space at El Mocambo in late 1999, moved to the upstairs space in January 2000, and in late 2001, when El Mocambo was threatening to close, to Lee's Palace, where it continued as a monthly event until 2006."
 * In "personal life", the following sentence: "He volunteered as a peer counsellor at the Toronto Lesbian Gay Bi Trans Youth Line for many years."
 * (c) . [[Image:Green tick.svg|16 px]]
 * The article does not appear to contain any original research.

:
 * (a) ; [[Image:Green tick.svg|16 px]]
 * The article appears to be appropriately broad in its coverage.
 * (b) . [[Image:Green tick.svg|16 px]]
 * The article does not appear to go into unnecessary detail.

.
 * The article appears to represent all relevant viewpoints. As a minor note, I'd say that the amount of quotes you use, despite all quotes being attributed, gives the article a vaguely promotional feel.  Ideally you'd fix that by presenting contrary viewpoitns as well, but it seems likely there won't be any such contrary opinions in reliable sources, so the long term strategy may simply be to reduce reliance on quotes either by eliminating quotes or expanding the article to make them take up proportionately less space.  In any case, none of that is necessary at the GA level.

.
 * The article does not appear to be the subject of rapid changes, edit wars, or ongoing disputes.

: 
 * (a) ; [[Image:Green tick.svg|16 px]]
 * Done - The offending image has been removed and all remaining images are appropriately tagged and licensed.
 * You have a problem with Image:Will Munro collage of Klaus Nomi.jpg. It's not in the public domain, and it only qualifies under fair use for critical commentary on the artwork, which this article does not (and should not) contain.  Generally, it's not possible to illustrate the articles of 20th/21st century artists with their art, for this reason.  Unless you can come up with a better fair use rationale you'll need to remove the image (and then delete it from Wikipedia).  (Your other image is fine, though.)
 * (b) . [[Image:Green tick.svg|16 px]]
 * Images are relevant to the topic and are appropriately captioned. (You should consider adding alt text, but this is not required for the GA process.)



Overview - This article should be able to be promoted to GA status with only a small amount of work. I will place this review on hold, pending resolution of the issues identified above. Leave me a message at my talk page when you're ready for me to respond. Thanks! - DustFormsWords (talk) 22:49, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Updated overview (post changes) - The article now meets all of the Good Article criteria and will therefore be promoted to Good Article. Thank you for your co-operation with the review and congratulations on bringing Will Munro to Good Article status! - DustFormsWords (talk) 22:20, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Changes made as suggested. Thanks! Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 03:46, 1 February 2011 (UTC)