Talk:Scott Pilgrim vs. the World/GA1

GA Review

Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch|noname=yes}}

Reviewer: Rusted AutoParts 19:00, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Will look over this article, submit changes needed before passing. Rusted AutoParts 19:00, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

First off, a film article should have a film poster in the infobox.
Is the Ellen Page speculation really needing to be included? Unless she was in consideration or in negotations, which in that case the sentence about her should be rewritten.
Not sure the Brie Larson picture in Music is necessary. Also I don't think the two pictures of Emily Haines are needed, just the one if a picture of her is to be used.
Analysis section should be placed above Release section.
Top ten list is not expansive enough to be included in article. So it should be removed.
Ensure all sources used in the article are archived.

Work on those, I'll keep an eye out for any other changes that need work. Rusted AutoParts 19:08, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking this! I’ve included the poster, removed the Ellen Page mention since it wasn’t very sustained speculation. The Brie Larson image was included half to have the caption (the information is all in the article, but not as succinct) and half to use a picture of the European premiere (release would be too saturated with it) - I ask if you think that a picture of the premiere in London would fit and be suitable elsewhere?

I though the MOS would have Analysis below release (above response)? Also, is it a GA requirement that all sources are archived? It’s not a criteria I’ve ever seen. I can do it, but am on mobile at the moment so it would have to be later.

Not sure if it's a requirement but I've found it's a preference. It's a process I had to do for Steve Jobs and La La Land so that all sources in the article can still be accessed in the event they get deleted or lost. Rusted AutoParts 21:55, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I’ll move the top ten list (it isn’t exactly short) to the accolades page.

Kingsif (talk) 21:52, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll also add that I am especially eager for feedback on the Analysis section - it feels like one of the weaker Analysis sections I have written, so I'm after even the smaller comments there. Kingsif (talk) 05:01, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rusted AutoParts: I see you’ve added a note about the Haines pictures, and while I’d say that the left image is a good comparison of appearance and the right of performance physicality (though the left works better than the right), perhaps we can put a pin in the image talk for now (see here, you may want to contribute), and resolve other queries. You’ll see I’ve started updating and improving sources, are there any other comments/concerns you have? Kingsif (talk) 23:19, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. That discussion seems at a bit of a standstill so it may end in no consensus. Rusted AutoParts 04:39, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rusted AutoParts: All the refs have been migrated to a cite source format, archive links added where possible (some pesky links just don't want to be archive by the Wayback Machine for some reason, but the urls work). ~~Just need to organize and alphabetize, is there anything else?~~ (done) Kingsif (talk) 18:21, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I feel every issue has been dealt with. Great job. Passed

Rusted AutoParts 05:51, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]