Talk:Tintin in the Congo/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Canadian Paul 01:27, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

I will be reviewing this article in the near future, hopefully tomorrow. Canadian Paul 01:27, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

...and here it is!

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. 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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

1. Per the disambiguation report, there are several ambiguous links that need to be rectified.
2. Footnote #37 does not lead where it is supposed to.
3. Footnotes #38 and #40 need proper citations, not just bare URL descriptions.
4. File:TintinCongo.jpg should have source information, whether you scanned it yourself or obtained the picture from a website.
5. Under "Plot", third paragraph: "Muganga and the stowaway then plot to kill Tintin by making it look like a leopard kill, but again Tintin survives, even saving Muganga from being killed by a boa, for which Muganga pleads mercy and ends his hostilities." - Need to mix up the word choice a bit here... "kill, kill, and killed" all in the same sentence is too repetitive and distracting.
6. Same paragraph: You have a direct quote here, which requires a direct citation, even if it is the same source used at the end of the paragraph.
7. Under "Background", second paragraph: The first sentence is too long and difficult to read... it should be split into at least two.
8. Same section, third paragraph: "As Jean-Marc and Randy Lofficier noted [...]" Who are these people and why should I care about their opinions? The relevance of their opinions should be introduced, even if only briefly. For example "As Belgian literary critics Jean-Marc and Randy Lofficier noted..." or something along that vein
9. Same paragraph, the large quote from Hergé is too long to be placed in the middle of the paragraph. Per WP:QUOTE, it should be made into a block quote or perhaps placed in a quote box somewhere near the section. For example, in the text itself you could just have "In the 1970s Hergé, in his interview with Numa Sadoul, admitted the errors in his understanding of the Congo" and then end it at that, with the exact quote in a box near the section. It is a useful quote, it's just too much to have in the middle of the prose.
10. Under "Original publication, 1930-1931", first paragraph: The direct quotes need direct citations.
11. Under "Second version, 1946", second paragraph: "In the 1946 colourised version, Hergé also introduced a cameo from Thomson and Thompson, the two detectives that he had first introduced in the fourth Tintin story, Cigars of the Pharaoh (1932-34), which was chronologically set after the Congolese adventure." Again, the word choice needs to be a little more varied, as per the double use of "introduced". I mixed up the word choice in the third paragraph ("improvement") to give you an example of how this can be done.
12. Under "Colonialism and racism", second paragraph, direct quote needs a direct citation.

I am going to put the article on hold for a period of up to seven days so that changes can be made. I'm always open to discussion, so if you think I'm wrong on something leave your thoughts here and we'll discuss. I'll be checking this page at least daily, unless something comes up in real life, so you can be sure I'll notice any comments left here. Canadian Paul 20:26, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for doing this, I will endeavour to make all of these corrections! (Midnightblueowl (talk) 16:42, 25 March 2011 (UTC))

Sounds good! Just leave me a note here when you want me to review this changes. Canadian Paul 05:28, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately, since no progress has been made in over a week, I am going to have to fail the article at this time. Once these concerns have been addressed, the article may be renominated. If you feel that this assessment was in error, you may take it to WP:GAR. Thank you for your work thus far. Canadian Paul 02:01, 5 April 2011 (UTC)