Talk:Fracture (Fringe)

Fracture (Fringe) 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.

Fracture (Fringe) is part of the Fringe (season 2) 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
June 5, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed
August 30, 2011	Good topic candidate	Promoted

Current status: Good article

Television: Episode coverage 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.

Science Fiction Low‑importance

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction 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.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Starstriker7^(Talk) 06:11, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again! I will review this one. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 06:11, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Criterion 1a (clear prose, spelling/grammar correct)

Plot

"While Peter and Olivia interview his wife, she gets sick with flashes " --> Clarify who "she" is.

"discovers the drugs the cop was injecting himself with." --> Can this be rephrased so there isn't a preposition hanging out at the end?
"can discover the project's doctors" --> can find the project's doctors?
"Peter learns from an old acquaintance the identity of one of the Iraqi doctors, who then tells them the project was meant to cure soldiers exposed to a fatal chemical, but it mostly failed to work, and turned remaining survivors into into human bombs" --> Two comments on this sentence. The first is that it is a run-on sentence, and it should be broken up. Secondly, "it mostly failed to work" sounds a tad awkward; try to rephrase it.
"A colonel now AWOL, Raymond Gordon, was opposed to the project shutting down, and Peter and Olivia suspect he is behind the cop's explosion, and caused the deaths by emitting a radio signal." --> This sentence is also a run-on. I find the "a colonel now AWOL" and "was opposed to the project shutting down" slightly awkward as well, so these should be rephrased in addition to breaking up the run-on.

All fixed

Production

"guest spot" --> I've never heard this phrase before. I don't think adding "guest appearance" again in its place would be overly redundant, but you should fix it in the manner you see most fit.

Fixed

Cultural references

"Peter mentions his father" --> mentions that his father?
Is Ms July supposed to have a period?

Both fixed

Reception (Ratings)

"Fringe was among the shows with the biggest increase, " --> Insert a "With the debut of this episode" at the beginning.

Not to sure where I would insert this one. Currently the sentence says "After time shifted viewing was taken into account, Fringe was among the shows with the biggest increase, as its 18–49 rating rose 30 percent to score 3.9." Do I insert "with a debut..." before "after time shifted viewing"?

Criterion 1b (meets MOS guidelines on lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists)

Lead

The lead says "generally negative" reviews, and the reception section says "generally mixed."

Fixed to say mixed

Criterion 2a (all info cited, ref section exists)

All clear here.

Criterion 2b (inline citations to reliable sources; challengeable stuff cited)

All clear here too.

Criterion 2c (no original research)

All set.

Criterion 3a (main aspects addressed)

Yes, they are.

Criterion 3b (article is focused just right)

To tie reference 8 into its first citation location concerning Ms.(?) July, you should mention that she was a Playboy model.

Fixed

Criterion 4 (no undue weight)

I mentioned a note about a discrepancy between a tidbit of info in the lead and in the Reception section; otherwise, no problems here.

Criterion 5 (stable)

Stabler than a mountain.

Criterion 6a (fair-use images have all their papers in order)

All set.

Criterion 6b (images are relevant and have good captions)

Everything is good here.

Overall comments

Once again, just a couple comments to address. Good work, Ruby. Keep them coming. :) --Starstriker7^(Talk) 07:07, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed/replied to all of your comments. Thanks very much for the review! It's much appreciated :) Ruby2010 comment! 15:06, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Of course! I made one last copyedit, but you've done a great job with the fixes I've requested. This one is a pass. :) --Starstriker7^(Talk) 20:11, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Fracture (Fringe). 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: 5 June 2024).

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) 21:46, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]