Talk:The Infinity Gauntlet/GA1
GA Review edit
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Adamstom.97 (talk · contribs) 09:04, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
I'm going to take this one for review. On first glance, it is looking pretty good, but I'll take some time over the next few days to make my way through it and try give it a thorough review. I'll be back here then with some more feedback. - adamstom97 (talk) 09:04, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks Adam. You might find comments left here useful. Argento Surfer (talk) 12:34, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
- Okay, after going through the article and reviewing the previous FA attempt it looks to me that this article is actually pretty close to FA quality, let alone GA. I'll try to give some helpful feedback for little bits and pieces here, and then hopefully your next attempt at FA gets a few more eyes on it. Here are some things to consider:
- How were the "Main characters" in the infobox selected? If it was based on some official Marvel listing somewhere then that is fine, but if it is arbitrary / based on a reader's interpretation then you should probably just stick to saying Thanos (since his name is on the cover).
- The first reference to Infinity Gems in the background section should probably be linked.
- The table of tie-in comics could probably do with an explanatory caption or lead-in line, just to clarify its purpose. It's also unsourced, which I don't think is a big issue due to the nature of its content and WP:PRIMARY sort of applying to this sort of table, but it could be an issue in a future FA attempt. Perhaps consider adding a reference column that has sources for the info and the fact that they are tie-ins?
- Similarly, I think you should consider finding sources for the character list.
- Other than those, I really do think that this is a pretty great article that meets all the criteria, so I'm just going to go ahead and pass
this review. Well done. Take what I have said here into consideration if you are still serious about FA, and good luck! - adamstom97 (talk) 01:06, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Okay, after going through the article and reviewing the previous FA attempt it looks to me that this article is actually pretty close to FA quality, let alone GA. I'll try to give some helpful feedback for little bits and pieces here, and then hopefully your next attempt at FA gets a few more eyes on it. Here are some things to consider:
Argento Surfer asked me for my two cents here. I've written four GA articles myself, one of which was from scratch, but I've never reviewed one before. What I did do was copyedit the Lead, since that's something I have a lot of experience working on with comics-related articles. I hope that helps. Nightscream (talk) 20:05, 18 March 2019 (UTC)