This review is transcluded from Talk:Eva O'Hara/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk · contribs) 23:17, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: AirshipJungleman29 (talk · contribs) 14:05, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments to follow soon. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:05, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Citation numbers refer to this version

• 1) first paragraph of "Career": not sure why each sentence needs an individual citation, but all verified.
• 3b): close paraphrasing, needs rephrasing. the quotes don't help if what's between them is also taken near-directly from the source.
• 4) don't see where "O'Hara portrayed Mrs Robin" is verified.
• 15 good
• 16 good
• 17 a & b) good

4/6 is not fantastic, will conduct another spotcheck later. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:51, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, with #4 it was because her specific role was part of another source, which I must have forgotten to include. I added it now. I have also fixed 3b (now 3c) DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 20:07, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

3b) is not fixed: "she had firmly established Verity as one of Hollyoaks' best additions in "recent memory"" is just paraphrasing of "cementing Verity as one of the greatest additions to the show in recent memory". I'd suggest cutting the sentence down significantly to avoid CLOP. Otherwise, all good. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:34, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@AirshipJungleman29: I am really not sure what do here. I do not know how to cut down the sentence significantly as it is a short sentence. I just removed the second bit... DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 11:44, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've trimmed it a bit more. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:46, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's a short article, so I'll focus more on the prose than I usually would. I find the paragraphs on Hollyoaks especially overly dense and detailed. Here's a few examples of what I mean:

• Her agent is not mentioned in the body, and tbh I can't see why it should be in the infobox.
• The sentence "O'Hara was with her boyfriend when she got a call from her agent telling her that she had won the role." is not very encyclopedic. The paragraph could also be divided here for easier readability, with the first half focusing on her casting and the second half on her character's storylines (MOS:LAYOUT). You could also add the first sentence of the following paragraph.
• "When O'Hara was filming her debut scenes, she fell over and hit the floor, which she recalled as being humorous and "a nice way to break the ice" with her colleague." also feels more like trivia than encyclopaedic detail.
  • This is the only bit I did not change as I do not believe it is trivia as it is quite an unusual experience and it is an important part of her Hollyoaks career as it talks about her experience and how it helped her break the ice. However, if it makes or breaks the article I will remove it. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 20:15, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "O'Hara felt that Verity's fashion style had impacted her to wear more colourful clothing" seems to belong more in "Personal life" than in "Career".
• The sentence beginning "Verity's storylines on the soap..." end with six citations, and it's not entirely clear which parts of the sentence are verified by each source. For WP:INTEGRITY reasons, it would be preferable to cite the source for each storyline directly after the corresponding comma. This helps readers and editors to easily verify the information.
• "with the actress revealing that she was "immensely proud"" sounds quite sensationalist. Just say "O'Hara said she was immensely proud".
• "In March 2022, Verity played a pivotal role...portraying Verity" do you mean O'Hara in the first instance?
• "Verity's death scene involved real paramedics performing CPR." another sentence that seems more trivia than encyclopaedic.
• "where she spoke about the importance of having conversations with the community, explaining ... "I think the attention and the conversation needs to be had with the queer community"" This sort of says the same thing twice, except she doesn't actually speak about the importance, just what she thinks should happen. Some rephrasing needs to be done here.
• "O'Hara has ... O'Hara gained ... O'Hara enjoys" we can use a pronoun or two. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:01, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @AirshipJungleman29: Thank you so much for the review. I have fixed all of the general comments (except one, which I have replied to) and the spotcheck and I think I have fixed your concerns. Please let me know. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 20:14, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]