Jump to content

Talk:Jonas Quinn/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
Looks good so far. Just a few suggestions:

  • the nation of Kelowna on Langara (SGC designation P2S-4C3) - no idea what the brackets mean. Is there a way to write it out of universe?
  • persuade O'Neill to give him a chance - how about "Colonel O'Neill" just on the first (re)mention, as is done with "Major Carter" above?
  • the courtyard of MGM's Santa Monica offices - spell out/link Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer.
  • Joseph Mallozzi stated in an online chat - "chat room"?
    • replaced with simply "revealed". It doesn't matter where he stated this.
  • Could you use a conversion template to convert 25 pounds to kilograms?
  • agreeing with writer Robert C. Cooper that Nemec had done a "fine" and "wonderful" job - are these quotes from Davis or Cooper? Wording isn't clear.
  • The reception section is made up completely of quotes from cast or crew members. Though they discuss the audience reaction, I'd say a few comments from reviewers are needed for a broader perspective. Even those quotes only cover the initial backlash and do not mention subsequent fan reaction.
    • I have expanded a little bit with info from this Stargate book. I've always found it hard to locate third-party sources for Stargate SG-1 before season 7 (Jonas was a season 6 character), and I am astonished Jonas can carry his own article in the first place (I got lucky on eBay twice).
  • Should ref 6 use an ampersand as the others do?
    • An "and" means that two people wrote a Stargate episode, while "Joseph Mallozzi & Paul Mullie" are a writing duo who always get credited with an "&" even if only one of them writes an actual episode. I think Mallozzi once said the "and" and "&" is a legal thing.

I'll put the GAN on hold, so you'll have a week to make changes. Good work and good luck (and hopefully a good article)! —97198 (talk) 06:12, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the thorough review. I have tried to address all your points.[1] Let me know if there's more to fix. – sgeureka tc 23:36, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nice work, especially on expanding that reception section - there aren't as many critics' comments as I would've liked, but if they're non-existent and the section's beefy already it doesn't seem like a valid complaint. I'm happy to promote the article. :)97198 (talk) 08:48, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]