Talk:Boromir/GA1

Latest comment: 3 years ago by BennyOnTheLoose in topic GA Review

GA Review edit

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

Reviewer: BennyOnTheLoose (talk · contribs) 13:24, 29 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Many thanks for taking this on. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:43, 29 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Chiswick Chap: Thanks for all your work on the article, and for your responses to my review comments. I'm happy to pass this for GA. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 16:30, 29 May 2020 (UTC)Reply


GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):   d (copyvio and plagiarism):  
    Reviewed all matched of 1% and above using Earwig's Copyvio Detector. No concerns.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
    Fair use rationales provided where required.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  

Happy to discuss, or be challenged on, any of my comments. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:24, 29 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

  • Infobox  
  • Lead  
  • Literature   - has a couple of lengthy quotes, but not inappropriately.
  • Names and titles  
  • Interpretation
"but oblivious of the potential danger" - suggestion not a requirement: consider changing to something like "but with him being oblivious to the potential danger"
Tweaked.
"Further, his death" - I suggest "Further, Roland's death" for even greater clarity.
Done.
"gives the appearance of signalling" - is it just "signals" ?
Source has "seems to presage..."
"Boromir's funeral compared to the ship-burial in Beowulf" consider crediting Lee and Solopova in the heading (like for Burns, in the Gandalf article)
Multiple scholarly sources have made the comparison, so I felt that it had reached the level of general scholarly knowledge rather than one or other scholar's contribution.
  • Portrayal in adaptations   - OK with amendments as per below.
Noted.

Sources edit

  • Pesch - Assuming Good Faith.
  • Seaman & Drout  
  • Rutledge - Assuming Good Faith.
Authorlink added. She's a senior Anglican priest so I think we can trust her on matters of Good and Evil. :}
  • Burkard, Schauer & Wiener  
  • Shippey  
  • Solopova (2009) - Assuming Good Faith.
  • Fimi  
  • Hall  
  • Lee & Solopova (2005)  
  • Beck - "In the former, he is dressed in barbarian garb, a departure from Tolkien's text" - is this in the source? I can't see p.155 in my preview.
Removed, it's not on p. 155.
  • Riel Radio Theatre  
  • Nordic Drama - is this a reliable source?
I think so, it's professionally edited, not by fans or the public.
OK. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 15:12, 29 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • EW - doesn't appear to support "In a departure from the structure of Tolkien's book, Boromir's death is shown at the end of The Fellowship of the Ring (2001), instead of being related at the beginning of The Two Towers" (It may be supported in the paywalled version.)
"As Boromir in The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, Bean takes three arrows to the chest while defending the Hobbits from brutal Uruk-hai. 'It’s my favorite death scene,'" supports the statement that the scene is in the FotR film. The rest isn't controversial but can readily be cited.
I think if you add in the book citation that would cover this off. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 15:12, 29 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
Added.
  • ScreenRant  
  • Rilstone - is this a reliable source?
I think so; Rilstone is a notable game designer, well-informed on Tolkien.
Having read up a bit, if he had published the piece in the magazine he edited, I wouldn't have raised a question. His blog post that has equivalent editorial oversight and does not contain exceptional or controversial claims seems a suitable source in this context. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 15:36, 29 May 2020 (UTC)Reply