Talk:Pest of the West/GA1
GA Review[edit]
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Gen. Quon (talk · contribs) 22:49, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
- Image: "…playing in a Western desert of Dead Eye Gulch." -> I feel that 'of' should either be 'in' or 'near', or something similar. 'of' just doesn't sound right.
- Plot: "…have famous relatives who had helped Bikini Bottom." Helped the city do what?
- Plot: "…named Krusty Kantina…" add 'the' between 'named' and 'Krusty'
- Plot: Any idea why SpongeBuck has to face Dead Eye Plankton? Did he get challenged to a duel?
- Plot: "Pecos Patrick tells to defeat Dead Eye Plankton, SpongeBuck must smack him several times." What? There's something wrong here…
- Plot: Did SpongeBuck step on Dead Eye accidentally, or on purpose? Maybe clarify.
- Production: The second sentence of the first paragraph really belongs in the "Reception" section
- Production: "…audience[…] And" There needs to be a space between 'audience' and the bracket. Also, decapitalize the 'A' in 'And'
- Production: All of the talk on how Nickelodeon promoted the episode on the internet really belongs in the "Reception" section, as well
- Produciton: "The featured song in the episode called "Idiot Friends", performed in the epilogue, was…" -> "The song featured in the episode's epilogue, "Idiot Friends", was…"
- Production: There's hardly an info on production in this section. It's mostly info on the episode's airing, and DVD release. This is a problem.
- Cultural references: "featured" should be "features"
- Cultural references: "Other western conventions in films get spoofed, as well." Like what? Please expand upon this, or remove it.
- Reception: "shoot" is too un-encyclopedic. Maybe use "raise" or "move"; same goes for "handily", just remove that word.
- Reception: "Mavis cited his favorite line: "I'll bet you're somebody's famous poop-covered ancestor."" This is just kind of out-of-the-blue. It doesn't really add to the reception section, and it doesn't even identify who said it
- Reception: I feel uncomfortable called either Yahoo! Voices or Blogcritics reliable sources, since they have little to no editorial oversight. Every time I remember trying to use them in an article, I was told to remove them.
- If we decide to keep the two, "Dunces and Dragons" needs quotes around it
- Furthermore, the whole "Blogcritics reviewer's kid wants to know if they had an ancestor", while cute, doesn't add anything to the episode or its reception, so I suggest you remove it
- Reception: "…was negative on the DVD…" -> negative towards, negative about, etc. "on" is just the wrong preposition to use.
- Reception: The segue from the negative review (DVD Verdict) to the review about the song seems a little abrupt. I'd move the info about the song to another paragraph.
- References: You can link a lot of the works/publishers in the references, such as Zap2it, Newswire, AllMusic, Entertainment Weekly, Deseret News, Chicago Sun-Times, etc.
- References: What's with the British style dating (DD MM YYYY)? I used to do that too, but since this is an American article, it's preferred that the dates be MM, DD YYYY.
All in all, there are quite a few prose issues. Also, I'm worrying about the near lack of production information. I will place this on hold for seven days for the changes to be made.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 02:00, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you very much Gen. Quon for the review! I hope the article is OK now to pass GAC. Also, I have added some prod info. Thanks! :) Mediran (t • c) 05:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)