Talk:Angry Andy

Angry Andy has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Angry Andy is part of the The Office (American season 8) series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 5, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed
November 7, 2012	Good topic candidate	Promoted

Current status: Good article

Television: Episode coverage / The Office Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by The Office task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Comedy Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Angry Andy/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Dom497 (talk · contribs) 22:44, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
Pass!

Comments[edit]

Everything is good, nothing needs to be fixed.--Dom497 (talk) 23:57, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Screenshot[edit]

The image needs to have a solid rationale in order not to get deleted; it can't be just for decorative purposes. This includes both the template on the page and the image in the infobox. The fact that both are required was brought up during a Deletion Submission for an X-Files episode earlier and I was told to add why the image is necessary to both the template and the infobox. You can see the discussion here. I try to add a rationale to all my articles I work on. Please stop reverting this.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 02:41, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But this has nothing to do with the screenshot! It would be more appropriate to say something to the affect of "this episode brought back Andy's anger issues that were first explored upon the character's introduction." or something that isn't basically an opinion. Saying reviews were critical of the scene doesn't help readers looking at the screenshot. If they want to know what critics thought of the episode, they can go to the reception section. A reader looking at the screenshot would want to know what it is of, and why is was important to the episode. Andy punching the wall and his actions because of it are why he got fired, which was what the whole episode was building up to. That's why the screenshot is important, its represents a turning point for the season and the series as a whole. Not because "many critics" didn't like it.Caringtype1 (talk) 19:18, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I can get behind that. Check out Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria, and look at Number 8, "Contextual Significance". It says "Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." As of right now, it's just a dude punching a hole in a wall, which is easy to explain in text. I'll add what you suggested, and then it will have some contextual and visual significance for staying. I hope you don't take this as "Nu-uh! I'm right." I just don't want the pic to get deleted.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 19:36, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks I think it is much better now.Caringtype1 (talk) 19:43, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Angry Andy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120423015607/http://www.nbc.com:80/the-office/episode-guide/season-8/401526/angry-andy/episode-821/479402 to http://www.nbc.com/the-office/episode-guide/season-8/401526/angry-andy/episode-821/479402/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:55, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Angry Andy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:17, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]