Talk:British Academy of Film and Television Arts announces recipients of 2023 Film Awards
Review of revision 4710887 [Not ready][edit]
 |
Revision 4710887 of this article has been reviewed by Heavy Water (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 19:13, 22 February 2023 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: @Moondragon21. Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews. |
Revision 4710887 of this article has been reviewed by Heavy Water (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 19:13, 22 February 2023 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: @Moondragon21. Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews. |
Review of revision 4711444 [Passed][edit]
 |
Revision 4711444 of this article has been reviewed by Heavy Water (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 06:12, 25 February 2023 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: @Moondragon21: Really, really, really pushing the boundaries of not disqualifying myself by becoming a major contributor to this. Let's go point by point. Copyright: not a problem, to my pleasant surprise. Verifiability: I had to cut things, like "French-British" from the description of Mackey or nearly all the genre descriptions; please source-check everything before submitting. NPOV: not really a problem, although one sentence had to be attributed to CNN. Style: this was where the issues really lay. I contemplated not-readying again on the basis of this article resembling a bland listicle more than a news article. My advice: incorporate quotes, expand your article when there's more information in the sources (OK, there wasn't much more in the sources here), and remember WN:PYRAMID. Also, please add a relevant infobox and basic categories (location, event, people) in the future. All in all, I forged ahead with editing myself because: A. the media just put out bland listicles; B. we're not far from the one-week staleness deadline. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer. |
Revision 4711444 of this article has been reviewed by Heavy Water (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 06:12, 25 February 2023 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: @Moondragon21: Really, really, really pushing the boundaries of not disqualifying myself by becoming a major contributor to this. Let's go point by point. Copyright: not a problem, to my pleasant surprise. Verifiability: I had to cut things, like "French-British" from the description of Mackey or nearly all the genre descriptions; please source-check everything before submitting. NPOV: not really a problem, although one sentence had to be attributed to CNN. Style: this was where the issues really lay. I contemplated not-readying again on the basis of this article resembling a bland listicle more than a news article. My advice: incorporate quotes, expand your article when there's more information in the sources (OK, there wasn't much more in the sources here), and remember WN:PYRAMID. Also, please add a relevant infobox and basic categories (location, event, people) in the future. All in all, I forged ahead with editing myself because: A. the media just put out bland listicles; B. we're not far from the one-week staleness deadline. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer. |
- And please see the edit history for how to resolve these things. --Heavy Water (talk) 06:13, 25 February 2023 (UTC)