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

Reviewer:Some Dude From North Carolina (talk·contribs)01:17, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I'm going to be reviewing this article. Expect comments by the end of the week.Some Dude From North Carolina (talk)01:17, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Add alt text to every image being used.

• Added. —Bloom6132 (talk)03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• "best new play" should be capitalized.

• Done. —Bloom6132 (talk)03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• "was of the opinion" - kinda wordy

• Replaced. —Bloom6132 (talk)03:23, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• "the The Public Theater" → "The Public Theater"

• Fixed. —Bloom6132 (talk)03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Remove the comma afterBecause He Can.

• Done. —Bloom6132 (talk)03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

• The title for #1 should be "Arthur Kopit – Awards".

• Removed it altogether, because it is not reliable perWP:IMDB. —Bloom6132 (talk)03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• RemoveWP:ALLCAPS in #4. That citations also appears to be dead.

• Changed to lowercase and removed URL. —Bloom6132 (talk)03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Use thecite Rotten Tomatoes template for #15.

• Done. —Bloom6132 (talk)03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Fix the link for #19.

• Fixed. —Bloom6132 (talk)03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Mark references fromThe New York Times with "|url-access=limited".

• Done. —Bloom6132 (talk)03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Mark references fromThe Washington Post with "|url-access=limited".

• Done. —Bloom6132 (talk)03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Mark references fromTime with "|url-access=limited".

• Done. —Bloom6132 (talk)03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• WikilinkMichael Coveney andMel Gussow.

• Linked. —Bloom6132 (talk)03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Archive sources withthis tool or manually.

• Done most.Chicago Tribune sources cannot be archived inInternet Archive. —Bloom6132 (talk)03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Some Dude From North Carolina: thanks very much for the review! I hope I've addressed your comments satisfactorily. —Bloom6132 (talk)03:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (seehere for what the criteria are, andhere for what they are not)
It isreasonably well written. a(prose, spelling, and grammar): b(MoS forlead,layout,word choice,fiction, andlists): It isfactually accurate andverifiable. a(references): b(citations toreliable sources): c(OR): d(copyvio andplagiarism): It isbroad in its coverage. a(major aspects): b(focused): It follows theneutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It isstable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated byimages, where possible and appropriate. a(images are tagged and non-free images havefair use rationales): b(appropriate use withsuitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·