Talk:Frozen Fever/GA1

Latest comment: 8 years ago by SNUGGUMS in topic GA Review

GA Review edit

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

Reviewer: SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 06:07, 3 October 2015 (UTC)Reply


I'll review. Expect comments within a few days. Snuggums (talk / edits) 06:07, 3 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Lead
  • This currently does not fully summarize the article per WP:LEAD as it fails to take into account the plot, the production process, and what critics said about the short
Plot
  • "It's Anna's birthday and Elsa plans to throw her the perfect surprise party" → "Elsa plans to give Anna a perfect surprise birthday party"
  • "huge" in "huge party" isn't necessary
  • "try to get the little snowmen under wraps"..... control the little snowmen
  • "After some near misses, Elsa collapses and nearly falls off the clocktower. Finally, Anna manages to convince Elsa" → "After Elsa collapses and nearly falls off a clocktower, Anna manages to convince her"
  • "It is a big hit with Anna, but Elsa accidentally sneezes a giant snowball through a birthday horn (bugle horn or bukkehorn) cannon-balling it all the way to the Southern Isles, where Hans is serving punishment for his actions in the first film by scooping horse manure"..... overkill, just go with "While Anna enjoys the party, Elsa sneezes a giant snowball through a horn that flies to the Southern Isles, where Hans is seen scooping horse manure".
  • "Anna tells Elsa that allowing her the chance to take care of her was the best birthday present of them all"..... too wordy, just say "Anna tells Elsa that her favorite birthday present was the chance to take care of her"
  • It isn't really necessary to say Olaf "takes the tiny snowmen under his wing"; just say he brought them to Elsa's ice palace
Release
  • This and its subsection "Home media" are far too short for their own sections/subsections per MOS:PARAGRAPHS, so I'd merge it with "Reception" to make a "Release and reception" section
Reception
  • See above note on merging into a "Release and reception" section.
Production
  • "Is as follows" from "The summary of the short is as follows" isn't really encyclopedic, and including a summary quote here is repetitive when there's already a section for the plot
  • Let's specify that Menzel's interview was with Time (magazine), though the quote currently used seems repetitive.
  • No need to including Gad humming the "Making Today a Perfect Day" after recording it or Hyperion being used for Big Hero 6
References
  • The Huffington Post isn't exactly the best of sources, though I found a better source here for the short's duration
  • While The Hollywood Reporter does list cast members, it doesn't give the names for what their roles are, though they can be found here
  • Are "Collider", "MovieViral", or "mysanantonio.com" reliable sources?
  • "Collider" is very reliable but I can't say about the others. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 02:37, 9 October 2015 (UTC)Reply
  • Is "TheWrap" a good reference? I'm also not sure it's really necessary when Entertainment Weekly and Variety are already included
  • "TheWrap" is very reliable, and I think it should be kept for now. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 02:37, 9 October 2015 (UTC)Reply
  • Not really; they have pretty much no journalistic credibility Snuggums (talk / edits) 02:42, 9 October 2015 (UTC)Reply
  • Okay, I get it. I've added another source along with it, but we can also use it even it's not much reliable. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 02:24, 10 October 2015 (UTC)Reply
  • National Geographic Kids doesn't say it took "approximately" six months to create, it just says "Frozen Fever only took six months" to create
  • Not sure if "Moviefone" is reliable, but it doesn't mention Zootopia either way
  • It's reliable, and yes it doesn't say anything about Zootopia and that's why it is in the brackets. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 02:37, 9 October 2015 (UTC)Reply
  • Is "Comingsoon.net" reliable?
  • This should just be labelled as BBC, so no need for the "Newsbeat" bit
  • Not sure if "The Hollywood News" is reliable
  • No it's not, but I will replace it as soon as I add some other reviews. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 02:37, 9 October 2015 (UTC)Reply
Overall
  • Well-written?
  • Prose quality:   Decent, but needs improvement
  • Manual of Style:   Not quite
  • Verifiable?
  • Reference layout:   Needs a bit of work
  • Reliable sources:   One unreliable source and several questionable sources
  • No original research:   Almost
  • Broad in coverage?
  • Major aspects:   Could use more reviews
  • Focused:   A bit of unnecessary detail
  • Neutral?:   No bias detected
  • Stable?:   Nothing of concern
  • Illustrated, if possible, by images?
  • Pass or Fail?:   Placing this on hold for seven days. It shouldn't be too difficult to patch things up. Snuggums (talk / edits) 06:18, 5 October 2015 (UTC)Reply
  • UPDATE: Captain Assassin!, this is almost ready for promotion. All that remains is to replace Buzzfeed, "MovieViral", and "mysanantonio.com" with better refs. Good work so far. Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:07, 10 October 2015 (UTC)Reply
  • @SNUGGUMS: I hope it's done now. I couldn't find any alternate sources for the "Buzzfeed" so I removed the content from that source. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 16:59, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply