# Talk:Vinicius and Tom

Still investigating, but a few of the sentences in this article seem to be lifted directly from multiple sources. Here's what I've got so far:

History section
First paragraph – one sentence (“The mascots' fictional backstories state that they were both born from the joy of Brazilians after it was announced that Rio would host the Games.”) from http://eurosport.com/olympic-games/rio/2016/2016-rio-olympics-biggest-stars-dates-schedule-mascots-logo-usain-bolt-triple-triple-zika_sto5694786/story.shtml
Second paragraph – violation of http://rio2016.com/en/news/meet-the-rio-2016-olympic-and-paralympic-games-mascots-and-help-choose-their-names (second half only)
Third paragraph – also violation of above URL
I have to go for now, but when I come back online, I will keep looking and see if I can rephrase. Mz7 (talk) 18:20, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

This should be  resolved. Mz7 (talk) 04:20, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm thinking about starting a Reception section soon. Here are some sources I gathered in my sandbox. A few of them are a little weird, so definitely not going to use all of them, and there may be more available to pull from.

[1] – generally negative, groups them in with other purportedly bad mascots, criticizes it as a slapdash mashup
[2] – mixed, "The mascot for the Olympic Games is almost always strange-looking, and Rio de Janeiro is no exception." ... "though they're by far not the craziest Olympic animals to ever exist"
[3] – appearances are "surprisingly cute", offers an alternative interpretation of the mascots, calling them "macabre reminders of the environmental sacrifices made for gold and glory", "The Olympic Mascots Represent All the Animals Brazil Has Displaced"
[4] – a bit more passive source, calling them "lovable" and "sweet and simple" and noting their symbolism (offers contrast to the Vice source, I guess)
[5] – this is a weirder one, it speculates that the creature of Vinicius could be genetically engineered in real life if "mad scientists" were given the resources
[6] – praises Rio 2016 for Vinicius's name: "Whatever ills the Rio Olympics have been going through, hats off to organizers for celebrating music, in a most joyful and profound way with their mascot."
[7] – mascots contribute to strengthened trade cooperation between Brazil and China
[8] – slightly sarcastic take on it; calls mascots "forgettable", but in a good way, since it doesn't have any glaringly bad qualities like some other mascots he mentions
Mz7 (talk) 04:44, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Image confusion with Adventure Time, anyone? JSH-alive/talk/cont/mail 04:00, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

I can maybe see a slight resemblance in artistic style, but I don't see how they could be confused with the characters in Adventure Time, especially when there are prominent logos of the Rio 2016 Games on the mascots' chests. Are you suggesting an encyclopedic problem or just making a general remark about the subject? Mz7 (talk) 04:18, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Well... Just wanted to remind that, if I remember correctly, there have been discussions on the mascots' similarities with AT characters in style. JSH-alive/talk/cont/mail 15:31, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
@JSH-alive: So, I found this source, which comments that the mascots "bare [sic] resemblances to characters from Adventure Time". I've added it to the article under "Reception" section, but I noticed many sources have compared the mascots to Pokemon, so I added a bit about that too. Mz7 (talk) 23:38, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Vinicius and Tom/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 17:38, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I will be reviewing this against the GA criteria as part of a GAN sweep. I'll leave some comments soon. JAGUAR  17:38, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguations: No links found.
Linkrot: No linkrot found in this article.


### Checking against the GA criteria
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 
Ref 22: the website field should be "BBC Sport"
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
No original research found.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 
NPOV
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

Excellent article, I couldn't find anything wrong with it. It meets the GA criteria, so by all means I'll promote this now. Well done! JAGUAR  12:40, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

@Jaguar: Thank you for your comments! I  updated ref 22. All the best, Mz7 (talk) 17:10, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

In my view, an infobox is not necessary on this article. Infoboxes make sense for articles about topics like books, films, and people, where the infobox might add new information such as ISBN numbers, links to the publisher, age, etc. In the case of Olympic mascots, however, the infoboxes that were added in these edits [9][10][11] don't really add anything significant to the article beyond what is immediately available in the lead section. On a more minor point, it also causes the image to be smaller in size. Mz7 (talk) 03:33, 12 May 2020 (UTC)