Talk:Chris Redfield/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Freikorp (talk · contribs) 01:35, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

I'll take this one. Rather than bring them up here, I will just fix any minor issues I see myself. If you're unhappy with any of my changes, just revert them and we'll discuss here instead. I'm happy for you to work on any issues I bring up as I bring them up; don't feel the need to wait until I finish the entire review. Freikorp (talk) 01:35, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

   Lead

   "Chris also appears in the live-action Resident Evil film series," - since he only appears in one of the films I think it is innapropriate to say he appears in the series - just mention the one film he appeared in.  Fixed

   According to the body only one source has commented on Chris' sex appeal. Accordingly I think it's a stretch to say he has been "recognized for his sex appeal" in the lead. Suggest lead focuses on another area, or at the very least attribute the mention to who ranked him the "seventh sexiest video game character" and when. Fixed

   Well I've added two more sources that comment on Chris' attractiveness in the "Reception" section. Will that suffice? If not, I could find more. PanagiotisZois (talk) 20:43, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

   Much better. Freikorp (talk) 23:30, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

   Resident Evil games

   A large portion of the text in the 'Resident Evil games' is unreferenced. Everything needs to be backed up by a reliable source, or removed.  Fixed

   In films

   The "rejected" film - when was it rejected? No time frame is indicated on when this script was written either. Both would be helpful.  Fixed

   Information about comic books appearances does no appear here.  Fixed

   The last two sentences in this section are unreferenced.  Fixed

   Other appearances

   "He will return in the sequel Project X Zone 2" - this games was released 2 years ago. Update this information.  Fixed

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   There are 'permanent dead links' in the reference section. These obviously need to be fixed. Handy tip: If you can't find a source archived at the Wayback Machine try archive.is.  Fixed

   Checklinks finds several more dead references and redirects: [1]  Fixed

   There is inconsistent date formatting in the references. For example: "Retrieved 2013-07-22" and "Retrieved April 24, 2015". Pick one style and stick with it. I would strongly recommend the latter (I.e April 24, 2015).  Fixed

   There are two citation request tags in the article. Obviously citations must be found otherwise the statements in question must be deleted.  Fixed

   There appears to be no standard reference format. Template:Cite web is used, but other online references are simply typed up manually and there is even a bare URL. You need to pick one method of referencing. I strongly recommend Cite web, in which case you should also use Template:Cite journal for the offline magazine references.  Fixed

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   As mentioned above.  Fixed

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Hi PanagiotisZois. I've identified all the major issues above. This needs some major work in terms of its references and unreferenced information. In the future I recommended at least using checklinks to make sure all the references are still live, and addressing all tags on the article (such as the citation request tags) prior to nomination. I have not commented on grammar/sentence flow or completed a source check yet; I will do this if the above issues are addressed. Please let me know if you think you can address these concerns or if you think you should withdraw the nomination, work on the issues, and renominate it at a later date. It's up to you. I am happy for this nomination to stay open longer than the recommended seven days, IF you can start addressing them and think you can fix them all in a reasonable time frame (certainly less than a month). Let me know what you want to do. Freikorp (talk) 12:26, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for reviewing the article. I will attempt to fix the issues you've pointed out. Hopefully in less than seven days. PanagiotisZois (talk) 16:15, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello @PanagiotisZois:, I chipped in and helped fix some of the dead-links. Please let me know if you need additional references for the Resident Evil Games section. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  20:17, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Looking good so far; keep up the good work. Freikorp (talk) 03:53, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Alright @Freikorp:, I believe I have fixed all of the issues. Please let me know if you believe the article requires additional editing for improvement. PanagiotisZois (talk) 13:58, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

I'll do a full review of this article later tonight. Right now I see two outstanding problems. Another editor has added information from RE 7. This is fine, but the lead now needs to be updated. The lead mentions Chris' roles in RE 5 and 6, but not 7. Also the term 'BOW' appears in the article three times but its meaning is never explained. What the term stand for should be explained (in brackets like this) after the first mention. Freikorp (talk) 05:08, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Final prose check:

• "Rockfort Island" - where is Rockfort Island? If it is fictional, specify this.  Fixed
• It is mentioned that Wesker dies in the first game then when the second one is mentioned he returns without explanation.  Fixed
• "Only Chris and Piers Nivans survive the assault." - So who dies exactly then?  Fixed
• "Chris continues to serve them in Piers' memory" - continues to serve who?  Fixed
• "Chris' increased muscle mass in the game" - this comes out of nowhere. I know its referring to RE 5, but other readers won't.  Fixed
• "According to PSU.com, Chris is" - it might be helpful to know when PSU made these comments. What year?  Fixed
• "(according to PSU.com, "now a beastly, muscle-bound warrior with biceps the size of water melons"[14])" Having this in brackets is un-encyclopeadic. Rework it into standard prose. Or just lose it.  Fixed

After these issues are addressed I'll do a source check and assuming that is all good I'll pass this. Sorry it's taking so long, I've been a bit busy. Freikorp (talk) 13:40, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. I'm in no hurry. PanagiotisZois (talk) 14:00, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Alright, I believe I've fixed all of them. I've also used CheckLink and all the dead links have been archived. For some reason it says two IGN sources change sub-domain but I've checked them and the link stays the same. PanagiotisZois (talk) 14:07, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Oh I can explain what that means. For example, the IGN link might be to the IGN article on the American server, whereas if you're accessing it from the UK or Australia it will redirect you to the same article but at. "uk.ign" or "au.ign" instead. It's not a problem. :) Freikorp (talk) 23:57, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Ok. Source check:

• Firstly something I've just noticed - you don't need citations in the lead for non-controversial information. Everything in the lead needs to be sourced later in the article, but that inline citation shouldn't be there.  Fixed
• source 29, the resident evil script, doesn't back up that Capcom fired Romero or that Anderson wrote the new script. I've moved the source to what it backs up, so you'll need a new source for the firing and the new script writer. Also the source is only the script itself and the wesbite hosting it doesn't fill me with confidence. If you could find secondary sources covering that Romero wrote a Resident evil script that would be good.  Fixed
• Both the James Hawkins sources and the Brittany Vincent source are not formatted with Template:Cite web.  Fixed
• The source consistency is much, much better, but there's still some inconsistency with source titles. For example most sources are referred to by their name (i.e IGN, Moby Games), however other are referred to by their URL (guardian.co.uk, Complex.com, Stars.ign.com). You need to pick one format. Going by name as opposed to base URL is preferred. Freikorp (talk) 00:33, 27 February 2017 (UTC)  Fixed

Fixed all of the problems. PanagiotisZois (talk) 02:31, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Excellent work. I'm happy for this to pass now. Well done on fixing everything; hopefully this has also given you some indication of things it is good to check prior to GA nomination :). As a final note, I do recommend going through and archiving all the sources when you get a chance. It will strongly increase the chances of this article keeping its GA status; sources will inevitably go dead and often the archive websites don't already have them saved when that happens. A little work now could save you a lot of work in the future. Freikorp (talk) 02:56, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

We still don't know if it's actually Chris in re7

Basically, a guy who Capcom says is Chris comes in an Umbrella branded chopper, yet the dude looks nothing like Chris due to him beng redesigned, which isn't saying much. The content he stars in in if it's him, well...it hasn't even been released yet. We ought to treat "Chris Redfield" being that character in the endings as speculation, or him truly even being that mystery man until proven otherwise.PeterMan844 (talk) 17:51, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Never mind. It's him.PeterMan844 (talk) 09:36, 4 September 2017 (UTC)