Talk:Robert Pattinson/GA1

GA review

Passed. E_F⁵ 16:49, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Nominator: 750h+ (talk · contribs) 13:45, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: EF5 (talk · contribs) 13:50, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'll be reviewing this shortly as part of WP:GARC. :) E_F⁵ 13:50, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Great thanks 750 h+ 14:19, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
$4.6 billion in the lede is adjusted for what year? Is it current? Same for all twenty-one other monetary amounts, which can be found by ctrl + g'ing "$".
this year, as explained below. what films gross generally doesn't have the inflation template.
It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
Reference [209] (Far Out) is flagged as unreliable. Besides that, references look good. Earwig finds several high-paraphrased sources in the 15%–25% range, although it then decided to have a spasm and fail to load so I'll get a 2O on paraphrasing.

removed the Far Out reference, others do the job

Copyvios seem to be mostly quotes and movie names so it looks fine. E_F⁵ 16:38, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
I have previously had an issue with another high-visibility article I reviewed, so I put some extra thought into comprehensiveness. While the monthly pageviews are over 200,000, a lack of editing the page and length shows that the article covers the main aspects of his life and career.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
No issues here.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
As above, high pageview amount. While the article is protected, this protection was enacted in 2020, making it over four years old. I have seen no recent edit warring or content disputes and the only recent significant changes were additions to prose just prior to the GAN by the nominator.
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
File:Twilight cast imprints at Grauman's Chinese Theater.jpg and File:MJK34346 Robert Pattinson (The Lost City Of Z, Berlinale 2017).jpg need alt texts per MOS:ALT and general consistency with other images.
done.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
There are a few issues, but none that are hard to fix. Pinging @750h+: for fixes, apologies for the delay. E_F⁵ 16:30, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@EF5: all done. i'll get to reviewing your article soon. thanks for the review. 750 h+ 16:43, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.