Wikipedia:Peer review/Dexter's Laboratory/archive2

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

Dexter's Laboratory[edit]

Previous peer review

* Further information

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to get the article to GA status or above. It has not been reviewed in a few years and is overdue for one because it has undergone much change since the last one.

Thanks, Paper Luigi TC 02:56, 28 June 2012 (UTC)


  • The sentence "52 episodes and a television movie" starts with a bare number. You should avoid this by either rephrasing (preferable) or spelling out the number (less preferable)
    •  Done
  • "Responsible for a change in direction for Cartoon Network, Dexter's Laboratory became the channel's most popular and successful original animated series, receiving high ratings and positive reception.": I suggest turning this around to make it more direct: "Dexter's Laboratory became the Cartoon Network's most popular and successful original animated series, and led to a change in direction for Cartoon Network. The show achieved high ratings and had a positive reception."
    •  Done
  • "(often by pushing the wrong button on an invention)": This includes the second appearance of "often" in the sentence. I'd suggest perhaps using "for example" instead: "(by pushing the wrong button on an invention, for example)"
    •  Done
  • "Dexter's arch-nemesis, a boy from his school named Mandark who lives down the block from Dexter and has a secret laboratory of his own.": this sentence doesn't have a verb. I think you want to say "Dexter's arch-nemesis is a boy..."
    •  Done
  • "Dexter's Laboratory was responsible for Cartoon Network's change in direction because of the way the show was designed and directed.": This is too vague when first introduced. We need to say how the show was responsible for the network's change in direction, and what, precisely, that change was.
  • UPA should be spelled out on first reference.
    •  Done
  • "The show was also notable in its unique sense of design and space and for the sharp timing.": This leaves numerous questions unanswered. I advise being more specific about what this "sense of design and space" was (are we referring to the discussion from the previous sentences?) Also, "sharp timing" doesn't mean much. Comedic timing? Timing of what? And I suggest removing "unique" since it doesn't add anything to the meaning.
  • "In terms of design it made very little attempt to recreate reality.": This does not mean much to me. It's a cartoon. Nobody expects it to recreate reality.
    •  Done
  • "Genndy said the character design for Dexter was made to be more of an icon.": More of an icon than what? And an "icon" in what sense? Like Elvis is an icon or a small picture on your computer's desktop is an icon?
  • "Genndy, in terms of style for the show,": Remove "in terms of style for the show"
    •  Done
  • "Tartakovsky noted that he tried to make Dexter and Dee Dee, as well as other characters, move in their own stylized animation.": What does "move in their own stylized animation" mean? It reads like gibberish to me.
    •  Done
  • "original run from 1996 to 1998, and was followed by the television movie" --> "which was followed by" etc.
    •  Done
  • "The segment "Dial M for Monkey: Barbequor", aired during the first season, was banned shortly after its first broadcast in the United States, due to featuring a character called the Silver Spooner": First, who banned it? The U.S. does not generally ban things of this sort. And it should be "because it featured a character..." etc.
    •  Done
  • "the middle segment would have centered around characters" --> "the middle segment centered around characters"
    •  Done
  • The "Recurring segments" section needs more citation. It looks like there's some WP:OR in there, i.e. "The segment's title likely derives from the DC Comics superhero organization The Justice League" (who says so?)
  • The article has no huge issues, and it shouldn't be much trouble getting it up to GA standards. It's almost there. All you need to do, I think, is make some improvements to the language here and there and explain better how the show caused the Cartoon Network to change direction -- and what that direction was. Don't make vague statements that aren't supported by an ensuing explanation. The citation issues need to be addressed, too. I hope this helps.--Batard0 (talk) 20:53, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
    • I fixed some things. Will work on some of the harder stuff in a bit :) Paper Luigi TC 03:22, 27 July 2012 (UTC)