Talk:The Blunder Years/GA1
GA Review[edit]
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: –MuZemike 23:06, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Overall, the prose looks pretty good, but I have a couple of issues that I have before I decide to pass:
- The image File:The Blunder Years.png (which I did do a fair-use reduction to comply with WP:NFCC#3b) fair use rationale needs the following additional information in order to comply with the WP:NFCC:
A reason that justifies its contextual significance to the article, i.e. spell out why the image's presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic and that its omission would be detrimental to that understanding.- Done.Queenieacoustic (talk) 00:54, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
It's fine that you listed how you feel it meets fair use, but you still did not justify the purpose behind the image, i.e. it shows Mr. Burns and Smithers Sr., and the contextual significance behind the production, as mentioned fairly well in the caption. That's what needs to be added. –MuZemike 01:49, 7 March 2011 (UTC)- My bad, I'll add it. Queenieacoustic (talk) 16:20, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
- Done.Queenieacoustic (talk) 00:54, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Where you got the image from (i.e. a URL if you got it from the web, screenshot from a computer program, etc.)- Done.Queenieacoustic (talk) 00:54, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
The caption in the infobox seems a bit long and drawn-out. It really should he shortened, as the rest of the information is in the article itself.- Shortened it. Queenieacoustic (talk) 00:54, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
I am not entirely convinced of the reliability of "DVD Movie Guide". I only see two people who run the site, and as a result, I don't see much at all for editorial oversight or fact-checking.- I'm pretty sure it's acceptable, seeing that the site has been used in several Simpsons GAs. If you're still not convinced, I recommend you addres the matter here.Queenieacoustic (talk) 00:54, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Also remember that you should only use the standard quotation marks as used on keyboards, as some browsers are unable to read the ASCII quotation marks. Also, mind the reference formatting (should be <ref name="Foo" /> instead of the more redundant and non-HTML compliant <ref name="Foo"></ref>). Finally, just include one citation at the end of the material that the particular citation covers; that helps cut down on "citation clutter".
- Trimmed down the citations a bit and I'm pretty sure I've already done the rest, so I'll just leave it at that for now. If I've done something incorrectly or if you have any suggestions, please tell me and I'll fix it. :)Queenieacoustic (talk) 00:54, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
On hold pending the few issues listed above. –MuZemike 23:06, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Passed – Sorry, but I didn't readily see the changes on that one fair-use rationale. Everything else looks good as far as GA standards are concerned. –MuZemike 15:51, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
- It seems I didn't save the description. I've added a description now, if you don't find it useful, just tell me and I'll change it. Thanks for the wonderful review by the way! I've found your suggestions to be very helpful and I look forward to encountering you again at some point in the future. :) Queenieacoustic (talk) 16:40, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
