Talk:A Cure for Pokeritis/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Taylor Trescott (talk · contribs) 22:23, 8 November 2013 (UTC) I will have a look at this article. Regards, Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 22:23, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

This isn't an incredibly long article, but it looks comprehensive and well-researched. Just a few questions:

• Plot sections generally don't need citations. Any particular reason why they are included here?
• One New Zealand newspaper described the film as "screamingly funny". Name of the newspaper?
• You talk about "Donald McCaffrey", "Christopher Jacobs", "Wes Gehring", "Gerald Mast", and "George King" in the reception section; since there's no wikilink for these people, you should give a brief description of who they are.
• Are there alternatives for sources 35 and 36? They don't look incredibly reliable, but they're just being used to source the fact that the film appears on a particular DVD so it isn't that big of a deal. Still, something that looks a bit more reliable would be a bit better. Unless I have missed something.
• In the External links section, you should be using the Template:Internet Archive film instead of what you currently have going.

Fix or respond to these and I'll probably promote this. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 17:08, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Let's see what I can do here:

• Cut the McCaffrey & Jacobs reference from the plot section. The Vitagraph Life Portrayals reference is the studio's summary of their own film's plot. I suppose it's probably not required, but I don't read the MOS as strictly forbidding such a reference, especially where a plot summary taken directly from the film might require some interpretation (which I'd tend to think a silent short would by its nature).
• Thames Star now specifically named in the text.
• I'll need a little bit to try to give context to the people who've written about the film without making this section any choppier than it probably already is. Let me see what I can do. Added descriptive clauses for McCaffrey and Jacobs and for King (whose name I know have right, mea culpa!). I've linked Gehring and Mast in lieu of describing them inline, I think both meet the notability threshold (clearly so in the case of Mast), and I'll see what I can do about getting at least a stub up for them.

• Mast now has an article, although I hope to snag a few more sources and flesh it out a bit more. Still seeing what I can do for Gehring. Identified Gehring in text. He's written a couple dozen books, including for some very prestigious imprints, and he is (or was) a columnist for USA Today, so I suspect he should be notable, but sources aren't really forthcoming, and I'm not going to make a crappy BLP stub to avoid just describing him inline here.

• I'd like to stand behind my use of Images. While university film studies resources are divided on whether it meets the standard of "scholarly" analysis, it's a reliable website with a publication policy and a permanent editorial staff, which meets our requirements for reliable sourcing. Also, several university programs (including BYU, for example) do recommend it as a resource for film and popular culture information; I think sourcing a VHS set's release date there should be accordingly acceptable. I think I have a print source for the DVD date, on the other hand ... let me get back on that. Reversing course on the DVD Journal link; I'm pretty sure its use is in line with consensus. It's very widely used in the project, including in a host of GA-rated articles and at least one Featured article.

• Alright, then, the ref's fine. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 21:23, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

• I can certainly swap to the Internet Archive template if that's preferred (although I think documentation suggests I should use Template:Internet Archive short film in this case); I didn't do so initially because its formatting doesn't match the widely-used IMDB template's formatting, and I felt that consistent presentation was more important than consistent use of templates. I can change that if its a problem, though.

• Just found the Internet Archive template that matches the IMDB template I'm using (Template:Internet Archive, obviously enough). So that's fixed now, too.

That's a first pass of responses. Let me see what I can do about the remaining concerns. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 15:44, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I think this looks ready for GA now and will promote it soon, unless you have any questions. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 21:49, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

• I've certainly got no objections! I appreciate your review and assistance, and if you've got any other comments or questions, I'm happy to field those, too. I've got a few more sources on their way via interlibrary loan in an effort to make sure my literature survey is "comprehensive", so it'll still be a bit until I consider FAC for this (and I'm sure the prose will need a cleanup pass before then; hopefully, I'll have enough material to get Gehring an article by then, too). Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 22:11, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

• Well, I promoted it - nice work on this, and I hope to see more silent film articles from you. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 22:32, 18 November 2013 (UTC)