Jump to content

Talk:The Equation

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleThe Equation has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 1, 2013Good article nomineeListed

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:The Equation/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 10:40, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to conduct the review of this article. I have a vague recollection of this episode. Probably if Community had started a year earlier, I would have remembered it better for having one of their cast in it! Anyway, I'll add notes as I come across them. Miyagawa (talk) 10:40, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • More an MOS than a Good Article requirement, but you don't need to add links in image captions that you've already included in the article text. So you should remove the link to Gillian Jacobs underneath her image.
  • Themes and analysis: The first sentence needs a citation directly after it as it contains a quote. I presume it'll just be a repeat of citation #8.
  • Ratings: "as it was the series' highest rating since the season's second episode" - perhaps worth a slight reword as I wasn't sure on first readthrough whether you were referring to Fringe or House.
  • Reviews: Could you link "John Scott" to the appropriate subsection on the list of Fringe characters?
  • Reviews: Delink the second link to The Same Old Story.

Otherwise nothing really stands out as an issue, all the references are formatted in a similar manner and each meet the notability guildines. You've even formatted the A.V. Club with italics which is often missed. All good. Nice job! Miyagawa (talk) 10:53, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done done and done. Thanks so much for the review! Ruby 2010/2013 04:12, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, let's run through the template then:

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

So all good. Nice job, happy to pass this one as a GA. Miyagawa (talk) 10:46, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Equation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:54, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Equation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:31, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Equation&oldid=1217227167"