Talk:Captain America: The Winter Soldier/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Prashant! (talk · contribs) 06:19, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Split this line as it's very long: "The film is directed by Anthony and Joe Russo, with a screenplay by Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely, and stars Chris Evans, Scarlett Johansson, Sebastian Stan, Anthony Mackie, Cobie Smulders, Frank Grillo, Emily VanCamp, Hayley Atwell, Robert Redford, and Samuel L. Jackson."

Lead is fine.—Prashant 17:10, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done :). --Captain Assassin! ^{«T ♦ C ♦ G»} 08:47, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've reverted this change, as this is the standard language decided by those who work on MCU films. I would discuss with Favre1fan93 or TriiipleThreat about what their opinions are, because we practically use a template to keep all of them of equal quality. Sock (pka Corvoe) ^{(be heard)}_{(my stuff)} 12:46, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah the sentance is almost identical to other GAs in the same film series so I not sure it has to be changed. However, this is a very minor issue and can easily be done if need be.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 13:09, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Anything else about the lead, @Prashant!:? igordebraga ≠ 04:19, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I said lead is very fine and I'll be completing it today.—Prashant 04:33, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Plot, Cast section are adequate.—Prashant 04:56, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Production

Development, Pre-production, filming and post-production sections are fine.

But, could you describe me the meaning of the word "coreography", in the filming section: "The fight scenes were staged for months, with a coreography that aimed to highlight Captain America's superhuman qualities, and "move away from impressionistic action into specificity"—Prashant 04:56, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is supposed to be "choreography" (have made the change) - "the sequence of steps and movements in dance or figure skating, especially in a ballet or other staged dance." In this case it refers to choreographing the movements of the actors and stunt men during the film's fight scenes.

That is Choreography! But, your word was "Coreography". I deliberately asked this as it's a simple word but, word mistake is what irritates me. Should have checked before nominating. Well, now you have corrected then fine.—Prashant 05:21, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That information where the spelling error was, was added by a non-frequent user of the page, after it was already nominated. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:09, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The spelling mistake was due to being a non-native English user, sorry. And I might not be frequent, but am helping what I can in the edits, and contributed in other Marvel articles (including Iron Man 3). Anyway, just see what the article needs. igordebraga ≠ 13:51, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the main problem of the article is it's lower sections, which are heartbreakingly small. Please add some more stuff in the Box-ofice and Critical reception section. Add more information regarding box-office collections. You should add more reviews as I think it's easy to find reviews for these kind of "Universally acclaimed" films.—Prashant 05:32, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see about the box office, what could be added that is notable info. I'll also add a few more reviews. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:09, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Expanded\rewrote the box office a bit, see if more is needed. igordebraga ≠ 13:51, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Last but not the least, check and correct the references as I found some of them are just urls. Please fill them appropriately.—Prashant 05:32, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you identify which ones these were? I did a quick scan through, and found them to be all complete. Thanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:09, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any bare URLs. --Captain Assassin! ^{«T ♦ C ♦ G»} 16:43, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely no bare URLs, all have titles and dates at the very least.--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 15:24, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Prashant!: Additional reviews have been added. Can you also please comment on what you meant above about checking the references for bare urls? Thanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:36, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think someone corrected, as there was definitely a few. Now, all my queries were adressed. I'm satisfied with the quality of the article.—Prashant 12:24, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Well, I didn't found any other problems with the article.—Prashant 10:18, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Pretty good effort overall, thanks for addressing the points and sorry for the delay.—Prashant 12:31, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Prashant!. --Captain Assassin! ^{«T ♦ C ♦ G»} 19:02, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]