Talk:Everybody Saves Father and The Only Girl in Camp

Everybody Saves Father and The Only Girl in Camp has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: July 1, 2015. (Reviewed version).

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Film: Silent / American This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles This article is supported by the Silent films task force. This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

I believe the Thanhouser stills are not in the January 7 edition of the MPW because the front is damaged from the Archive.org back up. The typical placement of stills suggest that another undamaged copy would contain the still. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:53, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Everybody Saves Father and The Only Girl in Camp/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 22:02, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The sweep is now complete. JAGUAR  22:02, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguations: No links found.

Linkrot: No linkrot found in this article.

Checking against the GA criteria

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   I would recommend splitting the lead into two paragraphs to make the lead more balanced, per WP:LEAD

   Nothing on the Production in the lead, despite the section being scarce the lead must summarise, even if it's minor

   The plot summary in the lead is quite extensive

   Is the list of people in the production sentence a definite list of people who worked on the film? The lead says otherwise

   The names in the Cast section are not in the lead

   The original story must be linked

   "but a four suitor has wed" - have no idea what this means

   Is there a citation for the eBay selling?

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   The assertions regarding the cameramen could be original research, but both candidates are included in the reference given.

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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Another well researched article that has nothing to make it be put on hold. Passing JAGUAR  10:59, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]