Talk:Coach's Daughter/GA1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

GA Review[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Hahc21 (talk · contribs) 05:09, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Review[edit]

Comments
  • Lead seems Ok to me, as well as the plot.
  • I have some concerns with Production. is that all information about the production of the episode? Nothing about how or who write it and which were their influences (as an example)? Or where it was filmed?
  • Well, i found this: [1]. Maybe this [2] could be useful, as well as this [3].
    • There is nothing else left about writing and producing this episode other than audience laughter. --George Ho (talk) 06:25, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Okay, but the section is like too short. Would that information be added into another longer section?
  • Ratings section is suspicious to me.
    • References at Ratings section are inaccessible: if offline, they are from microfilms. If online, I used the NewsBank and ProQuest with a help of my library card number. Is that okay? --George Ho (talk) 06:25, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
    • Also, ratings are of prior week of original and subsequent airings of this episode. How are they suspicious to you? --George Ho (talk) 06:26, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Well, maybe i wasn't clear. I was suspicious of the structure of the section, not the sources. Sources are okay. Haha, excuse me. I'm talking about mergin this section with reception, maybe that way it's better, but it's just a suggestion. —Hahc21 13:47, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
  •  Merged Production and Ratings sections into one: Viewership. --George Ho (talk) 14:49, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Reception is Ok.
  • Impact is Ok.
  • References are Ok.
  • I'll make some prose comments later on.

Hahc21 03:59, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Thanks for the answers and pardon me for the misunderstanding haha. Cheers! —Hahc21 13:47, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Ok. Good to go Good article. Congrats! —Hahc21 20:31, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.