Talk:Empedocles (The X-Files)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleEmpedocles (The X-Files) 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.
Good topic starEmpedocles (The X-Files) is part of the The X-Files (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
DateProcessResult
June 20, 2012Good article nomineeListed
July 26, 2012Good topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Empedocles (The X-Files)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hahc21 (talk · contribs) 14:40, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review[edit]

Minor edits i made:

Plot
  • "Jeb he sees a car chase" >> "Jeb witnesses a car chase"
  • "the murders is related to" >> "the murders are related to"
  • "through the head" >> "in the head"
  • "when they discovered Luke’s body, Reyes and Doggett both saw the body transform into ashes momentarily." >> "both Reyes and Doggett saw it transform into ashes instantly."
  • "convincing himself he did not see it" >> "convincing himself he did not saw it"
  • "Doggett soon attacks Mulder for looking into his son's case, but Reyes soon shows up" Redundancy of "soon". >> "Doggett soon attacks Mulder for looking into his son's case, but then Reyes shows up"
  • Other minor fixes. They're too many to note here.

Hahc21 04:20, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Luke's murder was solved in "Release"---- Knowing there could be trouble if Luke ever told anyone about Regali's "business", Regali killed Luke. 24.156.65.45 (talk) 22:15, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Verdict[edit]

GA review
(see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):
    b (citations to reliable sources):
    c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):
    b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
    b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

Overall:
Pass/Fail:

· · ·

Hahc21 04:38, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Empedocles (The X-Files). 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, 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) 00:00, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]