Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Transformers: Dark of the Moon/1

Transformers: Dark of the Moon

 * • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review
 * Result: Withdrawn by nominator. Replaced all references to a proper format, removed all unreliable sources and replaced them with reliable sources, fixed grammatical issues, added proper text to uploads and images, added alts to images, improved cast section, and corrected errors involving formatting and Wikipedia guidelines. Reassessment reviewer approves of all the changes.

The problem here is that the article is not a Good Article. User:Elencia very first edit was this, something strange on a newbie. Simple sight, the references have not the correct format, e.g.:
 * Ref 131: "GERMANY ALL TIME OPENINGS". Box Office Mojo. Retrieved 2011-07-07. -> This reference fails WP:ALLCAPS. Also, the date is different to the reference 138 -> Tony_Bacala. "Transformers Dark of the Moon Blu-Ray in November". Transformers World 2005. Retrieved July 9, 2011.
 * Here, also "Tony_Bacala" should be "Bacala, Tony".
 * References 79, 124, 125 and 127 have different formats, even when they come from the same site, Box Office Mojo.
 * 4 bare URLs.
 * A lot of inconsistences: YMD/MDY dates; publishers/workers/authors/dates missed
 * Many dead links
 * 3 dablinks
 * ALT text missed

Now checking the article itself:
 * 18 references in the lead. If the information is (supposed to be) in the article, it is not necessary to cite here (expecting WP:LEADCITE.
 * The cast section should be like this.
 * The infobox includes Japan release, per FILMRELEASE: "Release dates should therefore be restricted to the film's earliest release, whether it was at a film festival or a public release", and it already includes Moscow International Film Festival and North American ones.
 * Prose review:
 * It is the sequel to Transformers and Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen and was released on June 29, 2011 -> It is the sequel to Transformers and Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, and was released on June 29, 2011
 * The film was released in both 2D and 3D formats, -> The film was released in both, 2D and 3D, formats
 * As the Autobots continue to work for NEST - a United States military-Autobot alliance, they discover a hidden alien technology in possession of humans, -> As the Autobots continue to work for NEST—a United States military—they discover a hidden alien technology in possession of humans,
 * "and John Turturro reprise their starring roles, also Peter Cullen returned as the voice of Optimus Prime and Hugo Weaving returned as the voice of Megatron. Kevin Dunn, and Julie White have also reprised..." -> copy-edit needed
 * "who collaborated in the writing of the second film, was again involved in the writing." -> per above.
 * "their roles as Sam Witwicky's parents." -> Who is Sam?
 * "With Fox's character (Mikaela Banes) being dropped," -> What's doing Banes there?
 * "The film is currently" -> "Currently" is not appropiate
 * "The film is also currently the highest grossing Michael Bay film," -> The film is also the highest-grossing film directed by Bay,
 * and the highest grossing Paramount-DreamWorks film of all time -> Overlinked
 * The film was then released one day earlier, June 28, in select 3D and IMAX theatres, nationwide.[15][16] The film is currently the 2nd highest grossing film of 2011 (behind Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2) internationally. The film is also currently the highest grossing Michael Bay film, and the highest grossing Paramount-DreamWorks film of all time and also currently stands as the 7th highest-grossing film of all-time and highest-grossing film in the Transformers series and the only film in the series to gross over $1 billion.[17] The film is currently the 10th film in cinematic history to cross the $1 billion mark-in unadjusted dollars-and the third film in 2011 to cross the billion mark.[18] -> The film is currently, and, and, and, and. This deserves a copy-edit.

Discussion – This is just the lead and the references. I'd continue my review, but it is just a waste of time. This article does not meet the WP:GA? criteria, and it was only a bad review made by Elencia that would ended in a quick-fail. Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.  06:21, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The issues you've left me here have been addressed by me. If you would review this article any further, I'd be more than happy to correct them to retain the article's GA rating. Fanaction2031 (talk) 05:49, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, not all of them. The references still needing the correct cite web format. As you are working on the article I'll review all the article in the next days. Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it!  See terms and conditions.  05:59, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Still working on the references. It is indeed a mess now that you've mentioned it. Fanaction2031 (talk) 06:09, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Also edited the Cast section so it could be similar to the one in Ironman.
 * Fixed most of the references, please review the article now. Fanaction2031 (talk) 01:17, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Nehrams2020]] (talk • contrib) 06:24, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I'd also like to verify the authorship of File:MichaelBayShootingin3D.jpg. The image is claimed to be self-made by Fanaction2031, by the metadata indicates photo credit to go to Jaimie Trueblood, and a quick Google search pulls up images by the author here and here. If image's rights are not owned by the uploader, it needs to be deleted. File:OptimusPrimeTF3DOTM.jpg should be reduced in size and the fair use rationale expanded. More details need to be included to warrant the inclusion of the image of Prime per WP:FILMNFI, otherwise it currently looks decorative by its inclusion. If File:Transformers3Promotion.jpg is considered non-free, it needs to be reduced in size for fair use requirements. --Happy editing! [[User:Nehrams2020|
 * Fixed the problems. Fanaction2031 (talk) 01:17, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * You resized the images, but the bus image should still be a bit smaller, try shooting for a 300px side for one of the dimensions. If you did not photograph the Michael Bay image, it should be put up for deletion. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:37, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I deleted the Michael Bay image. I'd also agree with Geometry guy about the character image for Rosie Huntington-Whiteley. As a free image of here is potentially available (have been searching over the last few months but haven't secured one yet), it's inclusion is merely decorative. There are other free images of the cast members, search Wikimedia Commons for some others to add to the article. Looking at the content in the article, I think you'd be better off including a screenshot of the Driller rather than Prime. The quote indicates it's more complex than animating Prime, so it would better assist with the readers' understanding rather than showing something that required less work. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:49, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Alright, I'm going to upload a screenshot of Driller. Fanaction2031 (talk) 03:08, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. Fanaction2031 (talk) 03:54, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I reworded the caption for the image. I also was able to get a free image of Huntington-Whiteley, which I added to the release section. Feel free to move it if you have a better place. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:38, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your contributions! Fanaction2031 (talk) 05:17, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Keep Practically all of these complaints are examples of WP:What the Good article criteria are not: While I'm glad that the article has been improved, none of this is grounds for de-listing. This should not have been listed here. If the nom wanted the article to exceed the actual criteria, then he could have done that on his own. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:07, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Fails ALLCAPS? Who cares?  ALLCAPS is not one of the five MOS pages that GAs are required to comply with.
 * Dead links? Who cares?  Dead links are permitted, and their removal may be prohibited by WP:DEADREF (which was revised earlier this year).
 * Dab links? Who cares?  GAs are not required to be free of dab links.
 * No alt text? Who cares?  GAs are not required to have alt text.
 * Inconsistently formatted citations? Who cares?  GAs are not required to have consistently formatted citations.
 * Citations in the lead? Who cares?  LEADCITE permits citations in the lead.
 * Cast section not formatted in your favorite way? Who cares?  GAs are not required to have any particular style of cast section.
 * Infobox doesn't comply with FILMRELEASE? Who cares?  GAs are not required to comply with FILMRELEASE.
 * Another user that uses essays as rules. I'd be rich if I won a dollar each time I find a person like you. I have to remember you that the first point of the WP:GA? is: "Well-written: the prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct"; not "Well-written: the prose may be clear and concise (sometimes), and the spelling and grammar are correct, when is possible. I really like to know if you understand the WP:GA criteria, becasue as if "no one cares" about "essays of people that are mad with P&G", let me nominate Doug DeMartin as a Good Article right now. Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it!  See terms and conditions.  03:49, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I've pretty much did everything you've listed on the article reassessment page. If you would kindly review the entire article, I'll fix the rest of the problems you will list. Fanaction2031 (talk) 03:54, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * No, I'm not exempting the article from the requirement that it be well-written. You will not find your (already fixed) complaints about the clarity, concision, spelling or grammar of the prose anywhere in my list.  I have listed as non-criteria only those things that are actually not criteria.
 * You may be interested in reading WP:The difference between policies, guidelines, and essays. Some of our most important and widely supported advice pages, including WP:Use common sense and WP:Bold, revert, discuss, are "just" essays.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:08, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Just because an essay is used by people, does not mean that it is a policy or guideline, nor that should be followed. Either way, "common sense" redirects to an essay, not the simple policy (and there is nothing that can be ignored here). Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it!  See terms and conditions.  05:30, 16 August 2011 (UTC)


 * However... "Illustrates the character's appearance during the film" is not a valid fair use rationale for File:CarlySpencerDarkoftheMoon.jpg. The image is eye-candy with no educational purpose, and it is not discussed in the article. Geometry guy 00:25, 16 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment The lead must not contain references (because it must not contain anything new that is not present in the article; it only summarizes the below mentioned information) unless they are direct quotations. 50.19.78.29 (talk) 15:52, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Good point, removed the references from the lead. Fanaction2031 (talk) 22:16, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The IP says "The lead must not contain references," but nowhere does WP:LEAD state that. It used to state that the lead does not need references (two or more years back), per the rest of what the IP stated, but it does not state that anymore. In LEAD, it says, "Because the lead will usually repeat information also in the body, editors should balance the desire to avoid redundant citations in the lead with the desire to aid readers in locating sources for challengeable material. Leads are usually written at a greater level of generality than the body, and information in the lead section of non-controversial subjects is less likely to be challenged and less likely to require a source; there is not, however, an exception to citation requirements specific to leads. The necessity for citations in a lead should be determined on a case-by-case basis by editorial consensus. Complex, current, or controversial subjects may require many citations; others, few or none. The presence of citations in the introduction is neither required in every article nor prohibited in any article." So I'm wondering where the IP got the idea that "the lead must not contain references." Plenty of good and featured Wikipedia articles include references in their leads for more than just direct quotes. Sometimes the lead may even include something that is not covered in the lower body of the article, which can be fine. I'll mention this below in the section, where the most recent discussion is being had. Flyer22 (talk) 23:20, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Review
This is just the first part of the review. Due it is very long, I need additional time to check every phrase and reference on in. I'll add the second part tomorrow. Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.  07:10, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Here is the second part of the review. The only part that is missed is the References, because thare are many of them. I'll have them as soon as possible. Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.  03:56, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Big notice, (so you can notice)
I pretty much did everything, except for ""A thirty-second television" -> Consistency needed with the numbers". Please elaborate more on that, sorry. Fanaction2031 (talk) 05:29, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Throughout the article you have written out numbers bigger than ten, excepting here. thirty-second -> 30 second. Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it!  See terms and conditions.  05:34, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Done.
I am finally done with the references. Fanaction2031 (talk) 23:04, 19 August 2011 (UTC)