Main | Criteria | Instructions | Nominations | July Backlog Drive | Mentorship | Discussion | Reassessment | Report |
This is the discussion page for good article nominations (GAN) and the good articles process in general. To ask a question or start a discussion about the good article nomination process, click the Add topic link above. Please check and see if your question may already be answered; click the link to the Frequently asked questions below or search the Archives below. If you are here to discuss concerns with a specific review, please consider discussing things with the reviewer first before posting here.
See the Frequently asked questions (FAQ) |
To help centralise discussions and keep related topics together, several other GA talk pages redirect here. |
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9,
10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32 |
GA: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 Reassessment: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Nominations/Instructions: 1 Search archives |
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
I went and did a part of a GA assessment of Aoi Koga earlier today, can someone used to the GA process check if it is good? ABG ( Talk/Report any mistakes here) 05:47, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
We're now half way through the year 2024, but there are still over a dozen nominations from 2023 that never got reviewed. If you're not sure what to work on, consider reviewing one of these:
Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 01:29, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
The original review for 2022 City of Edinburgh Council election was messed up by a now blocked editor. The nomination was passed earlier today but, when updating this page, the bot hasn't recorded it as my 12th GA. Is there a way to correct that? Stevie fae Scotland ( talk) 19:35, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
@ Broc and Eiga-Kevin2: Hi, I was about to nominate this newly-promoted GA for WP:DYK and found an interesting factoid in the Critical response subsection, until I spotted close paraphrasing on a few texts in that section:
Article | Source |
---|---|
Tokyo-based film critic and journalist Mark Schilling wrote that Japanese critics frequently rebuke the films of writer-director Takashi Yamazaki, partly because "most are left-leaning" and view a few of his films, most notably the war drama The Eternal Zero (2013), as "nationalistic if not outright jingoistic". Schilling also mentioned that critic and historian Inuhiko Yomota was critical of Godzilla Minus One, calling it "dangerous". | Japanese critics, though, have long been hard on Yamazaki, one reason being that most are left-leaning and they see some of his films, especially his 2013 action drama “The Eternal Zero,” about WWII tokkōtai (kamikaze) pilots and based on a novel by rightist author Naoki Hyakuta, as nationalistic if not outright jingoistic.
Even “Godzilla Minus One,” in which a plucky band of civilians, including a disgraced former tokkōtai pilot, band together to save Japan from Godzilla, was called a “dangerous movie” by essayist and film historian Inuhiko Yomota in a Facebook post. |
According to The Hollywood Reporter, American critics praised its drama, low-budgeted visual effects, and usage of kaiju as a metaphor for social commentary, with many favoring it over recent Hollywood productions. | U.S. critics have unanimously praised the film for the remarkable visual mileage Yamazaki got out of the project’s relatively small budget, as well as the story’s moving human drama and canonical use of the kaiju as a metaphor for social critique. [...] Godzilla Minus One seems to be earning especially favorable comparisons to Hollywood’s recent output of franchise sequels — |
According to Dana Stevens, Ryunosuke Kamiki's performance is memorable because of his ability to convey the protagonist's vulnerability and emotional distress. | Kamiki’s anguished, vulnerable performance is one crucial part of what makes this protagonist so memorable, |
Broc, were you able to examine thoroughly the prose for close paraphrasing issues? Because there could be more in this section and elsewhere. The examples above are just from English-language sources, I think the Japanese ones should be examined further. If it turned out that the article contains even more CLOP issues, then it may need to undergo a GA reassessment. Nineteen Ninety-Four guy ( talk) 06:42, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Close paraphrasing without in-text attribution may constitute plagiarismhowever, in all three cases you raised there is clear in-text attribution. If these are the only copyright issues, I don't see the need for GA reassessment. Broc ( talk) 08:16, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
There is an ongoing chat about a few GA reviews that basic contain no recommendations for improvements....quick flyby passes if you will. I thought I would bring this up in a neutral manor focused on content before someone else does so in a more aggressive tone towards this good faith editor. The tone in the chat is very aggressive as if there's something else going on. @ PearlyGigs:
Moxy🍁 01:09, 10 July 2024 (UTC)