Talk:The Falcon and the D'ohman/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Glimmer721 (talk · contribs) 01:32, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

Good, but some work needs to be done.

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  • Wikilink Homer in lead.
  • Italicize A History of Violence in lead.
    • Green tickY Moved to production section. Not sure who added it to the lead... Theleftorium (talk) 16:57, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The episode also features a guest appearances by chef Tom Colicchio as himself in a segment in which Marge dreams about being a contestant in a Top Chef type of show." Is Colicchio a judge on Top Chef, then, as he's playing himself? If he is, mention this in the lead and production sections.
  • Did Wayne lose his home? It says he was fired and then Homer allows him to stay in Bart's treehouse.
  • Perhaps paraphrase this: As noted by Rick Porter of the website Zap2it, Sutherland's appearance in "The Falcon and the D'ohman" makes him "one of the relatively few Simpsons guest stars who've appeared more than once and voiced different characters rather than recurring residents of Springfield. Albert Brooks and Jon Lovitz are in the same category, though they've also had recurring parts. So did former semi-regular Phil Hartman, who's most associated with Troy McClure and Lionel Hutz but also played a number of other one-off characters." Instead of using the whole quotation, I would suggest just using the first part and summarizing the list of other actors who are in the same category.
  • "The Simpsons became the second highest-rated program in the 18–49 demographic in Fox's Animation Domination lineup that night, finishing before The Cleveland Show and American Dad! but after Family Guy." Wait, so shouldn't it be second if it finished before The Cleveland Show and American Dad! and after Family Guy on the list?
    • Yes, that's what the article already says ("The Simpsons became the second highest-rated program")? Theleftorium (talk) 16:57, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Typo there, sorry, I meant that it should not be second if it is on the list before two shows and after one. What the sentence says to me The Cleveland Show and American Dad! are before The Simpsons on the list (so higher up) and Family Guy is after it (in fourth place). Actually as I'm looking at the source, it seems the fact that Simpsons placed second is based on the 18-49 rating, not the total viewers, in which case it was in first place. Also, this lists the final ratings (8.08), while this just has the overnights. And in both of them Simpsons is first in terms of total viewers. Glimmer721 talk 23:10, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  • Some references are not properly cited. Use {{cite web}}. These would be ref #1 (needs author, accessdate, work, and is that really the title?), 3 (missing date), 10 and 11 (not proper templates or all fields; include language in 11), 12 (date and accessdate), 16 ("Television Blend" should not be italicized), 18 (needs the template too)
  • Ref #19 is dead.
  1. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  • In the "background" section you do not say what the public voted in the Ned/Edna poll. I think for it to be complete it should be noted.
    • It already does say that? "and encouraging them to go on the website and vote over the summer of 2011 on whether Ned and Edna should stay together." Theleftorium (talk) 17:29, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Sorry, that's not what I meant; I meant whether the results of the poll said they should or shouldn't stay together. Glimmer721 talk 23:10, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why isn't the History of Violence similarity noted in the production section? Maybe it would fit after the Ukranian reports of the Viktor similarity.
  1. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  2. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  3. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  4. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    It will pass if the issues are addressed, mainly concerning the references. Glimmer721 talk 03:05, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for stepping in Theleftorium, I wil pass this now. All issues have been fixed. Glimmer721 talk 17:35, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Falcon_and_the_D%27ohman/GA1&oldid=1085921525"