Talk:Norman Osborn (Sam Raimi film series)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Kaleeb18 (talk · contribs) 23:33, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

I'll be reviewing this one. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 23:33, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! — SirDot (talk) 09:56, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	also known by his alternate identity, the Green Goblin – put this at the beginning of the sentence right after Osborn and remove the comma after identity (also don't forget to put commas around it) popular enemies during the 1960s, and was – no comma character resurfaces in The Clone Saga, and has been adapted into other media – no comma on the page" and that he could relate – comma before and characters into the film, and worked hard to prevent – no comma with Dafoe confirmed in November – with Dafoe confirmed to be cast as him in November and success, and is quite disappointed with Harry – no comma needed "charted [Norman] Osborn's experimental serum-fueled – [Norman] not needed into madness" and that the actor's voice – comma before and expressed by the wearer, but scrapped after – was scrapped major points where we would be hooking wires – put [they] next to we deadline, and decides to experiment on himself – no comma Stromm and the military officials and Quest Aerospace – remove the and after Stromm and put a comma after Stromm. Then put a comma after officials chief J. Jonah Jameson for who takes pictures – remove for Parker and his aunt May and Harry and his girlfriend Mary Jane Watson – put commas around them instead of the word and over and over more to come... broken by Harry, and discovers a hidden lair – no comma called Goblin " a landmark villain", praising Dafoe's there is an extra space with the quotation mark
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. 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).	What makes Cinema Confidential (ref 17), and Moveline reliable
	2c. it contains no original research.	Spotchecks for refs 9, 25, 42, 50, and 60 are good
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	There is only a 21.9% violation possibility on the copyright detector
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.

@Kaleeb18: I have addressed all your comments. Except the "alternate identity" comment and "remove for". I'm keeping "alternate identity" after the Marvel Comics mention to keep consistent with MCU character articles. I don't think removing "for" would be grammatically correct. — SirDot (talk) 09:56, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

@Kaleeb18: Those further comments have been addressed. I checked the 21.9% copyright violation thingie and looks like it is for the Erik Sommers quote in the No Way Home section. I think that's okay. — SirDot (talk) 15:17, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

yes I meant that as in it is fine with no violations ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 15:18, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your thorough GA review, and my first GA! — SirDot (talk) 15:30, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

No problem, and that's awesome congrats ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 15:43, 21 June 2022 (UTC)