Talk:Pulp Fiction/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 18:34, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

GA review-see WP:WIAGA for criteria (and here for what they are not)

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose: clear and concise, correct spelling and grammar:

   • Much overly complex wording with too much detail crammed in.
   • Would give examples if there weren't so many other problems more immediate.

   B. Complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   • Per lead, it doesn't summarize the article. e.g. lede uses "neo-noir" three times but term is not mentioned at all in the article.
   • "Homage as essence" - what is the meaning of this heading? - that the film is homage at its essence, that is the essence of the film?

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Provides references to all sources:

   • 9 dead citation links
   • "that would feature often in later Tarantino films: Big Kahuna burgers (a Big Kahuna soda cup appears in Reservoir Dogs" - Reservoir Dogs (1992) was before Pulp Fiction
   • Are all the works listed in the Bibliography actually used in the article?

   B. Provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Main aspects are addressed:

   B. Remains focused:

   • Too much trivia - the reader becomes overwhelmed. Every single known fact doesn't have to be crammed in. e.g.
   • "Zed shares a name with Sean Connery's character in Boorman's follow-up, the science-fiction film Zardoz (1974)." - so what?
   • "In 2004, Tarantino discussed an idea for a movie starring Travolta and Madsen as the Vega brothers; the concept remains unrealized" - so what?

4. Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

   Seems to be slow edit warring going on, with no discussion on the talk page. Last talk page note was a spelling error on 16 August 2011.

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   Question whether 7 fair use images can be justified. These are copy righted images.

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

• Review is on hold. MathewTownsend (talk) 17:58, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
• None of the problems have been addressed. Article fails GA review. MathewTownsend (talk) 18:12, 31 January 2012 (UTC)