Talk:Arthur Kopit/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Some Dude From North Carolina (talk · contribs) 01:17, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Hey, I'm going to be reviewing this article. Expect comments by the end of the week. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 01:17, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Comments

• Add alt text to every image being used.

• Added. —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

• "best new play" should be capitalized.

• Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

• "was of the opinion" - kinda wordy

• Replaced. —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:23, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

• "the The Public Theater" → "The Public Theater"

• Fixed. —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

• Remove the comma after Because He Can.

• Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Sources

• The title for #1 should be "Arthur Kopit – Awards".

• Removed it altogether, because it is not reliable per WP:IMDB. —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

• Remove WP:ALLCAPS in #4. That citations also appears to be dead.

• Changed to lowercase and removed URL. —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

• Use the cite Rotten Tomatoes template for #15.

• Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

• Fix the link for #19.

• Fixed. —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

• Mark references from The New York Times with "|url-access=limited".

• Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

• Mark references from The Washington Post with "|url-access=limited".

• Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

• Mark references from Time with "|url-access=limited".

• Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

• Wikilink Michael Coveney and Mel Gussow.

• Linked. —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

• Archive sources with this tool or manually.

• Done most. Chicago Tribune sources cannot be archived in Internet Archive. —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

@Some Dude From North Carolina: thanks very much for the review! I hope I've addressed your comments satisfactorily. —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Progress

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: 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):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·