Talk:Donna Freedman

	; Archives (Index) ;
	2010/April; 2011/March; 2012/September; 2016/January; 2016/December; 2017/May;
	This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Donna Freedman has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
February 12, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

Soap Operas

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soap Operas, an effort to build consistent guidelines for and improve articles about soap operas and telenovelas on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit WikiProject Soap Operas, where you can join the project and/or the discussion.Soap OperasWikipedia:WikiProject Soap OperasTemplate:WikiProject Soap Operassoap opera

Fictional characters

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character

LGBTQ+ studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies

Australia: Television Low‑importance

	Australia portal Donna Freedman is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian television (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Donna Freedman/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Bramble claw x 21:32, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

After looking over the article, I can say that the article does not meet quick fail criteria. Therefore I will look over the article, and continue to review tomorrow. 21:38, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
Both seem fine to me.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
I'm going to pass the references. I have a slight, nagging concern about the character event description (section "2008-2011") being original research. However, I suppose that's largely unavoidable for works such as this (TV shows, books, etc.) If you could find sources for the plot summary that are not the show itself, that would be amazing though.

WP:TVPLOT does say that plot summaries don't normally require sourcing as the show itself is the source, but I'll do what I did on Chris Pappas and source a few storylines. - JuneGloom Talk 20:37, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Very, very detailed, but covers has a wide range of topics within its sections. Very good.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
Yes it's neutral.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
Yes it's stable.
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
It's not really feasible to include any more images, since they'd all have to be fair use, and wouldn't serve much of a purpose so I'll pass this as well.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

After weeks of grumbling to myself that no one was going to review this article, you had to pick it up right when I decide to give the storylines another trim. I really hope you don't mind that I trimmed them while you were reviewing and thanks for taking this article on. :) - JuneGloom Talk 01:26, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine. There's no rule about editing the article while the review is happening (as long as it's not edit warring). It is quite a long article, so it may take me a bit longer than usual to read the whole thing. Hope you don't mind... Bramble claw x 02:32, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mind at all, please take your time. :) - JuneGloom Talk 22:01, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Prose

In the lead, it says "steals Sunny Lee's first kiss". This sounds like a colloquial expression to me (I'm not familiar with this expression), but taken literally, it seems to imply that she robbed someone of a kiss (which of course, sounds rather weird). Therefore, I think it would be better to make that more clear to the lay-reader by changing the phrase. Bramble claw x

Done - JuneGloom Talk 22:01, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Same phrase about stealing a first kiss, this time in the section called Bisexuality. Bramble claw x 02:11, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done - JuneGloom Talk 17:55, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Any further issues for the writer to fix or can it be passed? Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 16:30, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No more issues. I was just spending a bit of time looking over the final stuff. The article is very well written, and is well-referenced. It presents lots of information, and is of excellent quality. Therefore, I am passing this GA review. Congratulations, and keep up the great work! Bramble claw x 22:12, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the review and for passing the article! :) - JuneGloom Talk 22:21, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Bramble claw x 22:24, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]