Talk:Demons (Star Trek: Enterprise)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Bruno Russell (talk · contribs) 18:58, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Have looked. Believe good article should be awarded against criteriaBruno Russell (talk) 18:58, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I don't mean to be cheeky, but are you intending to review the article, or should I ask for this review page to be deleted? Thanks. Miyagawa (talk) 17:54, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

To get this review moving, I'll add some comments.

"He had previously appeared in several parts of the same genre" That sentence seems a bit clumsy "2.0/4%" Change to 2/4%

Other than that I'd be happy if the article passed, although we may need to do something about the dormant reviewer ★★RetroLord★★ 01:07, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks for taking a look, I've reworded that sentence and made the other change as suggested. Miyagawa (talk) 19:57, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Requestion a second opinion as the original reviewer hasn't responding to requests to conduct a review. Miyagawa (talk) 18:50, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

• Miyagawa, I think I'd go with your original instinct, and have the review page deleted so a new reviewer can be found in the normal way. My reading is that the original reviewer didn't know what was involved, and thought the original sentence was sufficient; we both know that a GA review requires far more than that, and needs to address the GA criteria. However, it may be too late for that, now that we have some comments from Retrolord that have been addressed, in which case we can send the nomination back into the review pool so a GA2 page is what's created when a real reviewer signs up. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:16, 4 July 2013 (UTC)