Talk:A Parks and Recreation Special/GA1

Latest comment: 3 years ago by RunningTiger123 in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Some Dude From North Carolina (talk · contribs) 20:01, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hey, I'm going to be reviewing this article. Expect comments by the end of the week. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 20:01, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Infobox and lead

edit
  • Improve the non-free use rationale with this template.
  • Lead summarizes the entire article so that's good.

Plot

edit
  • Under 400 words so that passes WP:TVPLOT.
  • "cancelled" → "canceled" (American English)

Production

edit
  • Optional but some images would be nice.
  • "Afterwards" → "Afterward" (American English)
  • The writing credits for Aisha Muharrar, Matt Murray, and Jen Statsky need a source, so here's an article you can use.
  • The series finale → The series finale, "One Last Ride" (WP:EASTEREGG).
  • The source used used says England, so I wouldn't mention London without another reference.
  • The last quote in the fourth fifth paragraph is not mentioned in this article.
I can't find the first part of the quote in the source given so it might come from two sources. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 22:08, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
Both quotes are in that source, but I had swapped the order, which probably caused the confusion. The issue should be fixed now. RunningTiger123 (talk) 22:38, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Reception

edit
  • This source says the ratings were "in line with the show's final season" not the "series finale" as stated in the article.
  • "3.33 million viewers with a 1.3 rating" → "3.38 million viewers with a 1.0 rating" (source used).
  • Use the "cite Rotten Tomatoes" and "cite Metacritic" templates for citations instead.
    • The RT template won't work correctly for this special, and I'm not a fan of the Metacritic template because it omits quotation marks. Therefore, I've opted to keep the cite web templates for both. RunningTiger123 (talk) 21:52, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

References

edit
  • Sources are archived.  
  • Mark sources from Rolling Stone with "|url-access=limited".
@RunningTiger123: I got the paywall message on my computer so I would mark it. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 22:07, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Some Dude From North Carolina: Interesting. I was using private browsing, so maybe that messed with the paywall? At any rate, it's fixed now. RunningTiger123 (talk) 22:11, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
Article is close to being passed now. There's just one small comment in #Production left. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 22:14, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
  • Mark sources from Time with "|url-access=limited".
  • Mark sources from Vanity Fair with "|url-access=limited".

Progress

edit
GA review
(see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):  
    b (citations to reliable sources):  
    c (OR):  
    d (copyvio and plagiarism):  
  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, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  
    b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  

Overall:
Pass/Fail:  

  ·   ·   ·  

@Some Dude From North Carolina: All issues should be fixed; I've left a few comments above. My apologies for not checking that the sources and article matched – I should have done a better job checking WP:V beforehand. RunningTiger123 (talk) 21:52, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply