Talk:From Russia, with Love (novel)/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Ian Rose (talk · contribs) 09:03, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can't miss this one... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:03, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Strewth (as they say in your part of the world) that was quick! lol - SchroCat (^ • @) 09:24, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nearly a month passed by since the quick response.--♫GoP♫_T^C_N 12:17, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Good gosh, has it really been that long? My apologies, a lot got in the way but I should have the time for this shortly. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:40, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ian, Not a problem - been a bit busy myself in the intervening period too, so it's not an issue at all. Cheers - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:48, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Toolbox check -- no dab or EL probs.

Prose/Content -- a few things:

Need to decide if you're going to repeat links from the lead the first time they appear in main body of the article. For instance you link Soviet counterintelligence in both the lead and the plot but you only link SMERSH in the lead. Personally I treat the infobox, the lead and the main body of the article as separate, i.e. link things in each of those the first time they appear.
- Heh, I see you did link SMERSH further into the plot section so just leaving the above as a general reminder/observation.
I'm not sure that Fleming actually refers to the secret service as MI6 anywhere in this novel; if so we should not either.
Benson also sees Grant as a menacing individual -- although I enjoy Benson's book on Bond, this seems a bit of trite observation and I think should be dropped.
Not a showstopper by any means but I'd have thought it worth mentioning in passing that FRWL the movie is generally regarded as one of the best -- a couple of citations to that effect should be enough, e.g Benson and one another.

Referencing/Structure/Images -- no issues.

Summary –- nice work as usual, I was particularly pleased to see you work in Benson's "Fleming Sweep", which always struck me as a keen observation; if you can just deal with the minor points above I'll have no prolem passing this. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:43, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ian, Thanks for the review - and the ongoing copyedits you've undertaken. I've done the above, but used Rotten Tomatoes and the BFI as the reviews. If you want something a little more punchy along the lines of Benson etc, let me know and I can always add them in. - Cheers - SchroCat (^ • @) 09:20, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi mate, in retrospect I should've said best film adaptation, to relate it more closely to the subject of this article, i.e. the novel. Since I led you astray I've done the work to replace what you had with something from Benson -- hope it reads okay for you. I am of course ready to pass it if you're done otherwise... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:21, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK - get where you're coming from now! Much better, with only one minor ce done. Thanks again - SchroCat (^ • @) 10:37, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tks for correcting my typo -- it's appropriate after all your work that you have the last edit before it goes GA... ;-) Passing, well done! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:50, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ian - a nice review, as always! Cheers - SchroCat (^ • @) 11:00, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]