Talk:Bill Wurtz/GA1

GA Review

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

Nominator: Vigilantcosmicpenguin (talk · contribs) 03:44, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: TrademarkedTWOrantula (talk · contribs) 04:20, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

You can make a religion out of this. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 04:20, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

no, don't. :)  — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 02:58, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	A reference section is available for attribution of referenced sources.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	According to the Earwig report, the top result is at a 31.5% similarity. However, that's a song list, and the rest of the results highlight small snippets of text from the source.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Article is stable.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Due to their simple design, both images are ineligible for copyright and do not require a non-free use rationale.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Wurtz's profile picture is relevant, as it provides a clear symbol of his YouTube channel/internet personality. The thumbnail for the external video box helps depict information that cannot be conveyed in words alone.
	7. Overall assessment.

Quickfail?

• Y Article is stable.
• Y Earwig isn't a problem.
• Y First GA review; no previous mistakes to note.
• Y No valid cleanup banners or citation needed tags spotted.
• Y Nothing severe to note.

Few things to note

• Mashable's a bit of an iffy source to use. Per WP:MASHABLE, some articles may be sponsored content. I wouldn't consider using the source when other, more reliable sources could just as easily provide similar information.
  • Online pop culture is within the niche of Mashable, so the source should be fine for its reviews of online videos. None of the articles cited are labelled as sponsored.
• Never heard of OK Whatever. Is it reliable, considering how often it's used in the article?
  • I also had never heard of it before working on this article. It appears to be a reliable source, even if it has a "weird" niche. According to the website's about page, OK Whatever was led by a writer who has worked for SFGate and The Los Angeles Times, and it has won a Webby Award. So it should be a good secondary source about Wurtz's career, but I was cautious not to cite it about his personal life.
• Prose is a little choppy in the "public image" section

Lead

• Could have a sentence summary of his website
• "animated video creator" -> "animator" or "music video creator"
  • Done.
• Distinctive what style?
  • Rewritten to be more clear.
• "which includes" -> "composed of"
  • Text removed.
• Cut "calm" (the word "deadpan" already implies that)
  • Done.
• Wurtz has published music and videos dating back to 2002. -> Wurtz has created music and videos since 2002.
  • Done, but kept the word "published".
• He proceeded to upload his videos on Vine, where he gained his initial popularity, and on YouTube. -> He uploaded his videos on Vine, where he gained popularity, and on YouTube.
  • Done.
• He experienced breakout success on YouTube with his animated videos, History of Japan (2016), and History of the Entire World, I Guess (2017), which both went viral and inspired internet memes. -> Two of his animated videos on YouTube, History of Japan (2016) and History of the Entire World, I Guess (2017), went viral and inspired internet memes.
  • Done.
• Follow-up point: Aren't video titles usually in quotes and not italicized?
  • Perhaps, but MOS:TITLES doesn't specify, so I wasn't sure whether to change it.
    • The linked page considers videos, regardless of what medium they're released in, to be films. Therefore, they can be italicized.