Talk:Bart Sells His Soul/GA2

Latest comment: 15 years ago by Peregrine Fisher in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
I'll start the review soon. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 02:08, 26 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

OK, here are some suggestions that don't effect whether this article passes GA. Do them if you want, or not. Basically becuase I'm not sure they would be an improvement (I was a CS major, not an English major ;-) ).

" Bart pranks churchgoers by replacing the music to a hymn..." Maybe, "In the episode, Bart pranks churchgoers by replacing the music to a hymn..."
"clean the church's organ pipes." Maybe "clean the church's organ's pipes."
"Bart sells his soul to Milhouse..." Maybe "Bart then sells his soul to Milhouse..." or "Later, Bart sells his soul to Milhouse..." You get the idea. Some small word to give a timframe to the events.
"the show's approach to the nature of a soul." Maybe "the show's approach to the nature of the soul." Might be better, but I'm not sure.
The lead uses the word "episode" 9 times (10 if you like my earlier suggestion), the actual title 3 times, and "it" 2 times. It might be nice to mix it up a little bit more. No big deal.
"is regarded as one of the series' best and among the best of The Simpsons' seventh season." Maybe "is regarded as one of the seventh season's and the series' best."
"The creative team of The Simpsons put the episode" should be "The creative team of The Simpsons puts the episode"
" who claims he feared the fate of hissoul." Maybe " who claims he feared for the fate of hissoul."
"revert the restaurant back to its original run-down tavern." Maybe "revert the restaurant back to a run-down tavern."
"While she explains philosophers' opinions on the human soul, Bart happily eats it up." Eats up what she's saying, or the piece of paper?
It might be good to explain that Bart ultimately gets his soul back in the lead.
Response to above

Thanks very much, these were all good suggestions, so I have implemented all of them. I believe these have all been appropriately addressed and are thus done. :) Cirt (talk) 08:14, 27 June 2009 (UTC)Reply


Good news. OK, continuing with Production:

"Oakley and Weinstein wanted to start the season with episodes that had an emotional bias in an effort to center the Simpson family." Not sure what is meant by "emotional bias"
"which originated from his childhood." Not sure here. Maybe "came from his childhood." or "originated in his childhood."
"Moe's original design includes a missing tooth, but Weinstein and Oakley felt that it did not "look right" because Moe was such a prominent character in the episode." Probably should reuse the ref here since it has a quote in it.
"Moe with a missing tooth in them still had to be reanimated." Maybe "Moe with a missing tooth in them were still reanimated."

Cultural references:

"The song lasts for 17 minutes" is this the original, or the Simpsons version?

Themes:

"and then the scene cuts to Reverend Lovejoy counting his money and believes" Mabye "and then the scene cuts to Reverend Lovejoy counting his money and Booker believes"

Reception:

Looks good.

OK. This article is 1) well written 2) has citations and no OR 3) very nice size for what it covers 4) neutral 5) stable (that earlier edit war wasn't very fierce and has totally died down at this point) 6) it has a FURational, but it's not very specific. So, make adjustments per the above comments if you think they are an improvement, and add some wording to the image page as to why that image is important to the plot of the episode, and I'll pass it. Good work. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 16:38, 27 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Response to above

Thanks again, I have addressed these above points. Cirt (talk) 00:19, 28 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'll pass it, but you should improve the image rational a bit. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 02:28, 28 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
Thanks very much for your time. Cirt (talk) 03:06, 28 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
The image rational looks fine now. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 03:24, 28 June 2009 (UTC)Reply