Talk:Empire of the Sun (film)/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
In the Plot, this sentence ---> "Nagata visits Basie's barracks, finding soap Jim earlier stole", sounds very odd. In the Production section, "The filmmakers searched for various areas across Asia in an attempt to recreate 1941 Shanghai", I know what the sentence is trying to say, perhaps a little more explanation could do, for your everyday reader.
Half-check. The sentence from the plot reads very odd. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 22:50, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Check. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 19:02, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
In the Production section, it would be best if "J. G. Ballard" and "Elstree Studios" are linked once. In the Reception section, there's no need for "Rotten Tomatoes" and "Metacritic" to be italicized, since their websites.
Check. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 22:50, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

C. It contains no original research:

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!

-- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 17:32, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, the comments have been addressed. Wildroot (talk) 22:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you to Wildroot for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 19:02, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]