Talk:Loss (comic)/GA1

GA review

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

Reviewer: Bobamnertiopsis (talk · contribs) 00:06, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

1a

• The abbreviation "CAD" isn't used outside the Background section; I'd say either trim it entirely or use it for all subsequent instances of the comic's title. Also, italicize it if you plan to keep it.
  • Did the latter. GamerPro64 04:17, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
• In Background, there's an instance of the strip's title that needs quotes.
  • Done. GamerPro64 04:17, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
• The "Internet" in the header "Legacy as an Internet meme" can be lowercased for consistency with the other uses of the word throughout the article.
  • Done. GamerPro64 04:17, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
• "After the strip was published, it became an internet meme"/"The meme saw a resurgence around 2017." Is there any info on when it first became a meme? Was it immediately after it was published?
  • Yes immediately. GamerPro64 04:17, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
• Because the article is not too long, I don't know if you need to reintroduce a writer's publication the second time they're brought up (as in New York Magazine or Know Your Meme). This is ultimately up to you though and I defer to your preference.
  • Done. GamerPro64 04:17, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
• Joystiq and Kotaku can be italicized.
  • Done.
• "4chan's video game board /v/ would later ban users who created new threads about these edits." Was there a reason they banned this practice?
  • Not explained in the article. GamerPro64 04:17, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
• "a pattern you would never recognize unless you knew it" Could this be rephrased out of second-person, maybe to something like "a patter the viewer would never recognize unless they were already familiar with it"?
  • Used the rephrasing. GamerPro64 04:17, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

1b

• Layout's fine, words to watch are fine, fiction's fine, list incorporation's fine.
• The info about the actual form and plot of the comic that appears in the lead should also appear somewhere in the article body per the Lead section guidelines.
  • Added them into the section. GamerPro64 04:17, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

2a Refs look great and are consistent.

2b Source quality is good.

2c Well-cited throughout, no qualms!

2d The fourth paragraph of Reception has a lot of direct quotes which is fine but it also draws some other unquoted text directly from the interview (e.g., "he told the story from Ethan's viewpoint because that was the only reference he had")/ The whole para would benefit from another pass to make the paraphrasing less close to the source.

• • Reworked that paragraph. GamerPro64 04:17, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

3a Hits the main points well and in-depth.

3b No needless digressions, good work.

4 Treats the comic fairly based on available sources.

5 Fairly stable, a few edits every month or two but no major tug of wars.

6a

• Could the NFCC#1 and NFCC#2 sections in the Non-free use rationale for File:Loss comic.jpg be filled in? And could the correct article title (Loss (comic)) be included in the "Use in article (WP:NFCC#7)" field?
  • Done. GamerPro64 04:17, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
• The other two images a free and appropriately tagged.

6b I'm not sure how much the image of Krahulik and Holkins adds to the reader's understanding of the topic but I believe I've see other GAs with images of critics in them so I won't hold it against you. The other two images are super useful at illustrating the topic; I especially like the minimalist "Loss".

Overall this article is fairly close to GA status, good work on it so far. A few stylistic points to address, questions to answer, and bits to rephrase but the sourcing is good and overall the page has solid bones. I'll put it on hold for a week. Let me know if you have any questions or need more time! I'll also do a reference spotcheck once you're done addressing these points. Thank you for all your work on this article GamerPro64. Kindly —Collin^{t c} 00:06, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

• I think I covered all the issues here, Bobamnertiopsis GamerPro64 04:17, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks GamerPro64. I appreciate the changes you've made. I performed a reference spotcheck and note that ref 4 does not specify that Buckley's experience with miscarriage occurred in college, as the article states. Once this is cleared up I think this page will be a pass. Thank you! Kindly —Collin^{t c} 17:44, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Placed the New York Mag there since that was where that part came from. GamerPro64 03:50, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! With that, I believe the article now meets the GA criteria; that's a pass. Good work improving this one, GamerPro64. Kindly —Collin^{t c} 04:12, 9 May 2021 (UTC)