Talk:Chuck Versus the Cliffhanger: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 17:56, 28 July 2011

Chuck Versus the Cliffhanger 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
July 4, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed
July 16, 2011	Featured article candidate	Not promoted

Current status: Good article

Television: Episode coverage GA‑class 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
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
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.

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Matthew RD 19:22, 30 June 2011 (UTC) Hello, I will be reviewing this article. I shall do so soon. -- Matthew RD 19:22, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK now I will review the page. At first glance it looks good enough, lets look indepth and review it against the GA critera.

Well written: See notes below
Factually accurate and verifiable: Mostly pass, see notes below
Broad in coverage: Stays within topic. Passed
Neutral: Passed
Stable: Passed
Images: Two free images, they're fine (though Fedak's is blurry, but that's no issue)

Overall the article is well done, with just the odd issues.

The article is almost well written. The one problem I do have though is to fully pronounce initials (CIA to Central Intelligence Agency, then feel free to abbreviate it afterwards, like Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and/or keep it abbreviated in following mentions, and ER to emergency room)
- Done
I think the songs of the episode are more suited in the inbobox under "Music = " field, but it's alright if you feel otherwise. Other Chuck episode articles have music in the prose. It's up to you.
- For consistency, I think I'll leave it the way it is for now. I may change that on this and other episodes in the future, but I've only seen that parameter used for music performed in episodes of a series (like Glee).
You could cite ratings from the previous week and mention how much it's gone up like you did in Chuck Versus the Last Details. Again that's up to you.
- Done
Ref #2 says it was published in April 22, 2011, yet the web page itself says April 22, 2010.
- Fixed. Seems I mixed up the date and accessdate.
Ref #6 needs a publisher.
- Fixed. Tell me if there's anything else. :) --Boycool (talk) 14:23, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will place the article on hold for seven days, though I doubt this will take long. Good luck. -- Matthew RD 20:57, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for addressing the issues. I will pass the article. Well done, and I hope to see more Chuck episode articles like this. -- Matthew RD 23:52, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, sir! --Boycool (talk) 00:44, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-{{featured article candidates|Chuck Versus the Cliffhanger/archive2 }}
 {{ArticleHistory
 |action1=GAN