Jump to content

Talk:The Big Bang (Doctor Who)/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

Reviewer: Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 22:29, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll give the article a read through now and add comments below as I come across them. I really loved this episode, although I always thought they should have done more with the whole last centurion business. Anyway, I'm going off topic from the review, let me get back to that reading! :) Miyagawa (talk) 22:29, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lead: "6 million 696 thousand viewers" - I think it'd be better just putting it as 6.696 million viewers, or "around 6.7 million viewers". Plot: Caitlin Blackwood in brackets needs to be added after the seven-year-old Amelia Pond is first mentioned.

"Her touching the box allows it to revitalise Amy and let her out" - Not sure about the flow of the sentence - perhaps something along the lines of "She touched the box, allowing it to revive Amy and release her."

Filming and effects: Might want to mention that Brangwyn Hall is in Swansea, otherwise with it directly following Port Talbot, it makes you think that it's actually there as well.

Those are the only problematic issues with the article. Obviously an image in the infobox would be nice, but not necessary for the GA status. Miyagawa (talk) 22:56, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing! I've fixed everything above. I love this episode as well (it might even be my favorite) because I'm a big time travel fan (and there is nothing paradoxical about the Doctor giving Rory the screwdriver). Glimmer721 talk 17:18, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:


I believe the article now meets all the GA criteria. Nice job. Miyagawa (talk) 18:15, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]