Talk:The Dragon's Call/GA1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Midnightblueowl (talk · contribs) 20:41, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Right, I'll give this one a go:

In the introduction:

  • "the arrival of young Merlin (Colin Morgan)" – youth is in the eye of the beholder; perhaps use "young man" or something of that nature instead.
  • No need to mention that the series is an origin story twice in the introduction; remove the former.
  • "more well-known actors", change to "better-known actors" perhaps ?
    • I'm not quite sure "more better-known" would be grammatically correct. Glimmer721 talk 00:44, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
      • What I mean to say is that "better-known" should be used, not "more better-known". Midnightblueowl (talk) 17:23, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
  • "making the talking dragon work", change to "creating the talking dragon".

Under "conception and development":

  • "Looking back at "The Dragon's Call", Murphy and Capps felt that it had so much to introduce in terms of world and characters that there was not enough story.[6]" Could you clarify what you mean here?
    • Changed to "not enough of the main plot of the episode". Essentially, they said that the hardest thing and opening episode had to do was set up the characters and the world, and if they were being critical they felt that it did not have much of its own plot, or that the actual story wasn't in the forefront. I'm open to any other rewordings; it's sort of something hard to briefly explain. Glimmer721 talk 00:44, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Under "casting":

  • "a "big" but "ruthful"" – do you mean "truthful" ?

At this stage I have fixed everything. (I'm not sure if you are completely done with the review.) Anyway, many thanks for the review! Glimmer721 talk 00:44, 25 December 2012 (UTC)


Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well written:
1a. the prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct. A few alterations to improve the prose are required.
1b. it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. I'd have to recommend that the editor responsible for this page uses webcitation (as at Islam: The Untold Story) in order to preserve the sources; otherwise they might end up as dead links, and then the GA status of this page might get revoked.
2b. all in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines.
2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by images:
6a. images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content.
6b. images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
7. Overall assessment.