Talk:Eat, Pray, Queef/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

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

The article looks good. I will add some comments here that you can fix.

  • File:CartmanAnswers.png needs to be replaced with a smaller version.
    • I think the Spqueefsong.png photo is more appropriate for this episode than the CartmanAnswers.png one, so I replaced them, and replaced Spqueefsong with a smaller version. Let me know if you agree with this. — Hunter Kahn (contribs) 00:28, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • United States doesn't need to be wikilinked.
  • than 3 three million viewers and had over 1 one million (both in the lead and the reception section)
  • called the "Queef Sisters" – Queef Sisters should be in italics.
  • and men everywhere upset - I'm not an expert at English, but shouldn't it be "and men everywhere are upset"?
  • A preview clip of the episode listed in on South Park Studios, the official South Park website, in the week before the episode's broadcast was viewed more than 50,000 times – This doesn't really have anything to do with the production of the episode. It should be moved the the reception section.
  • It first aired on April 1, 2009 in the United States on Comedy Central – Same as above.
    • Which one above are you referring to? I think this does belong in production; the three other South Park episodes in the season all have it there, and I think it's better to stay consistent.— Hunter Kahn (contribs) 00:28, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The production section is a bit too small to have its own section in my opinion. You could probably merge it with the cultural references section (and change the name of the section to "Production and cultural references").
  • is a satirical reference to the book Eat, Pray, Love
  • Link Martha Stewart
  • File:Spqueefsong.png is a bit unnecessary and I think it could be removed.
  • Link If (magazine)
    • There's no article for it; there is an If magazine article, but it's the wrong magazine. — Hunter Kahn (contribs) 00:28, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Travis Fickett of IGN said the episode
  • second lowest rated episode on IMDb the Internet Movie Database
    • Done. — Hunter Kahn (contribs) 00:28, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • There's been a proposal on the talk page to drop this fact about the IMDb rating altogether. What do you think? I didn't add the IMDb thing, someone else did, so I could take it or leave it. If you agree, you could just delete it yourself if you like, or let me know and I'll do it. — Hunter Kahn (contribs) 13:13, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • Yeah, I've removed it.

As usual, I'll put the article on hold for a week. Good luck! :) TheLeftorium 15:27, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Nice work, I'll pass the article now. —TheLeftorium 14:18, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]