Talk:Arthur Adams (comics)/GA2
Latest comment: 9 years ago by SNUGGUMS in topic GA Review
GA Review edit
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 21:06, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
Overview edit
Prose: See below Resolved
Sourcing: See below Resolved
Coverage: No issues
Neutrality: No issues
Stability: No issues
GA Result: On hold for seven days Passed
Details edit
- Early life
"His father was a loadmaster in the United States Air Force, and as a result, his family, which would eventually include four younger brothers"..... maybe Adams and his parents and four younger brothers would read better. If his brothers' names are known, I'd include them.
- Career
-
- Longshot and X-Men
- "Reviewing the first issue for Amazing Heroes, R.A. Jones, who was not fond of the writing, said, however" is a bit of a mouthful. Try something like "In a negative review of the first issue for Amazing Heroes, R.A. Jones wrote"
- 1990s monster and creator-owned work
- "Although the Legend imprint ceased in 1998, Monkeyman and O'Brien continued to appear in print, sometimes in crossover stories with other comics characters, as in Savage Dragon #41 (September 1997) by Erik Larsen, and Gen¹³/MonkeyMan and O'Brien (1998), both published by Image Comics, the latter of which Adams wrote and drew for Wildstorm Productions" needs to be sourced
- The portion after "In 1996 Dark Horse Comics published Art Adams' Creature Features" needs to be sourced
- Influence
This section should just be one whole paragraph
- Personal Life
"Regarding religious beliefs" → "regarding religion"
Discussion edit
I implemented all the changes you recommended except these two:
- RE: Longshot and X-Men I thinking calling it a "negative review" is a characterization, which would violate WP:NPOV/WP:NOR. The fact that the reviewer liked the art so much that he considered it a saving grace for the book makes such a characterization complicated. Distinguishing the reviewer's reaction to the writing from his reaction to the art, I think, clarifies this for the reader. What do you think?
- Maybe Jones criticized the writing would be better. SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 22:52, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done. Nightscream (talk) 00:59, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
- RE: 1990s monster and creator-owned work Any creative or narrative work, such as a film, TV episode, book, etc. can be its primary source for its content and credits, as indicated by WP:FILMPLOT, WP:TVPLOT and WP:BOOKPLOT. The material in question pertains to the books' credits, which is all detailed in the credit areas of those books, which indicate who created them. Am I misunderstanding these guidelines?
Let me know what you think. Nightscream (talk) 22:21, 30 June 2014 (UTC)