Talk:Matt Selman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee Matt Selman was a Media and drama good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
October 12, 2010 Good article nominee Not listed

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Theo10011 (talk) 00:32, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

I am reviewing this article as one of the oldest GA nominees.

FAIL - I believe that the article fails the criteria for a GA Category on multiple grounds, it needs a general re-write of the entire article for cohesiveness, the length of the article is also an issue, it is too small at the moment. The article carries numerous quotes and references all of which are appropriately formatted but loses in terms of prose quality and the Biographical Information that are important to BLP articles. I would recommend a re-write and addition of some new information as the first possible solution. Theo10011 (talk) 00:45, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

I would also like to add an addition to the article's credits section, a table for his Filmography with additional information like year and his contribution to it as a possible recommendation. The lead section needs further tightening, its quotes superfluous amount of his filmography and Biographical information which should be retained for the middle section.Theo10011 (talk) 01:02, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your review. The article being "too small at the moment" is not a legitimate reason to fail it. The article has to be comprehensive, which it is, it does not have to be long. There really is not anymore information out there. Also a filmography table is fairly superflous, all of the information is there and unlike for an actor where it is easy to do, the same cannot be said for this. So the issue you have raised which I see as a problem is the prose. I would try and improve it, but, because you failed the article rather than put it on hold, why should I bother? Thanks anyway. Gran2 07:54, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi Gran, I just found that the article didn't live up to the level of similar articles in the category. I understand that you contributed heavily to it, but after checking the History of the article, I found it didn't receive many distinct edits recently, I assumed it might take longer to rectify those issues if I placed it 'on hold', I came across the page as the oldest nominated pages needing a review and did not want to prolong that process. I will try and correct the article myself when I find the time, in case you do not wish to, I would urge you not to give up on it and re-consider your decision. I hope you understand my intention, and please don't take the criticism personally. Thanks. Theo10011 (talk) 17:52, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Matt Selman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required on behalf of editors regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification, as with any edit, using the archive tools per instructions below. This message updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 1 May 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:08, 5 June 2017 (UTC)