Talk:The Incredible Hulk (film)/GA1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

GA Review[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

{{subst:#if:This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.|


This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.|}}

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    {{subst:#if:Well done.|Well done.|}}
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
    {{subst:#if:In the Development section, it would be best to link "Avi Arad" once, per here. The article tends to have "red links", if they don't have articles, it would be best to un-link them, per here.
    Half-check. Tell me, do the red links in the article link to anything? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:05, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
    Unlinked Morningside Park in Filming. While my philosophy is to let red links lie around to give someone else to prompt them to create an article, I don't think that park will ever deserve one. Alientraveller (talk) 08:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
    That's very true, but I'm just going with the MoS. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 17:48, 2 July 2008 (UTC)|In the Development section, it would be best to link "Avi Arad" once, per here. The article tends to have "red links", if they don't have articles, it would be best to un-link them, per here.
    Half-check. Tell me, do the red links in the article link to anything? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:05, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
    Unlinked Morningside Park in Filming. While my philosophy is to let red links lie around to give someone else to prompt them to create an article, I don't think that park will ever deserve one. Alientraveller (talk) 08:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
    That's very true, but I'm just going with the MoS. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 17:48, 2 July 2008 (UTC)|}}
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    {{subst:#if:|{{{2acom}}}|}}
    B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
    {{subst:#if:Reference 58 is missing publishing info. Does Reference 41 cover all this ---> "Producer Gale Anne Hurd acknowledged the Hulk, being green, was a popular environmental analogy, and Norton himself was an environmentalist. Hybrid and fuel efficient vehicles were used, with low sulfur diesel as their energy source. The construction department used a sustainably harvested, locally sourced yellow pine instead of lauan for the sets, and also used zero-or low-VOC paint. The wood was generally recycled or given to environmental organizations, and paint cans were handed to waste management. In addition, they used; cloth bags; biodegradable food containers; china and silverware food utensils; a stainless steel mug for each production crew member; a contractor who removed bins; recycled paper; biodegradable soap and cleaners in the trailers and production offices; and the sound department used rechargeable batteries"? In the Marketing section, does Reference 55 cover this ---> "Universal and its promotional partners have tried to position The Incredible Hulk as a franchise reboot similar to Batman Begins"? If not, a source is needed for that statement.
    'Nother half-check. Is there a source available for the last sentence in the Box office section? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:05, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
    All the article needs, a source for the this ---> "As of June 26, 2008, The Incredible Hulk has grossed $115,037,960 in the United States and Canada, as well as $201,124,524 worldwide". --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 17:48, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
    Done. Alientraveller (talk) 09:31, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
    Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 11:05, 3 July 2008 (UTC)|Reference 58 is missing publishing info. Does Reference 41 cover all this ---> "Producer Gale Anne Hurd acknowledged the Hulk, being green, was a popular environmental analogy, and Norton himself was an environmentalist. Hybrid and fuel efficient vehicles were used, with low sulfur diesel as their energy source. The construction department used a sustainably harvested, locally sourced yellow pine instead of lauan for the sets, and also used zero-or low-VOC paint. The wood was generally recycled or given to environmental organizations, and paint cans were handed to waste management. In addition, they used; cloth bags; biodegradable food containers; china and silverware food utensils; a stainless steel mug for each production crew member; a contractor who removed bins; recycled paper; biodegradable soap and cleaners in the trailers and production offices; and the sound department used rechargeable batteries"? In the Marketing section, does Reference 55 cover this ---> "Universal and its promotional partners have tried to position The Incredible Hulk as a franchise reboot similar to Batman Begins"? If not, a source is needed for that statement.
    'Nother half-check. Is there a source available for the last sentence in the Box office section? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:05, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
    All the article needs, a source for the this ---> "As of June 26, 2008, The Incredible Hulk has grossed $115,037,960 in the United States and Canada, as well as $201,124,524 worldwide". --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 17:48, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
    Done. Alientraveller (talk) 09:31, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
    Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 11:05, 3 July 2008 (UTC)|}}
    C. It contains no original research:
    {{subst:#if:|{{{2ccom}}}|}}
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism: [[File:|16px|alt=|link=]]
    {{subst:#if:|{{{2dcom}}}|}}
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    {{subst:#if:|{{{3acom}}}|}}
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
    {{subst:#if:|{{{3bcom}}}|}}
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
    {{subst:#if:|{{{4com}}}|}}
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
    {{subst:#if:|{{{5com}}}|}}
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    {{subst:#if:|{{{6acom}}}|}}
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
    {{subst:#if:|{{{6bcom}}}|}}
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    {{subst:#if:If the above statement can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article! Also, contact me if the above statements are answered.|If the above statement can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article! Also, contact me if the above statements are answered.|}}

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:52, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Reference 58's information wasn't worth of inclusion: glowing action figures, we're not a depository. And yes, References 41 and 55 do cover all that. I also didn't realise Arad had been overlinked in Development, I fixed that. Alientraveller (talk) 08:50, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I would like to thank Alientraveller for being patient in this review, but it needs to be clear that I was just doing my job of making sure that the article met GA standards. With that being said, congratulations, you know have a GA in your midst. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 11:05, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
You're welcome, and I didn't think it took too long, like you said, you helped me improve the article further. Alientraveller (talk) 11:34, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
You are quite welcome in that. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 11:44, 3 July 2008 (UTC)