Talk:Goodbyeee/GA1

Latest comment: 12 years ago by TBrandley in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: TBrandley (talk · contribs) 23:58, 24 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

  • Infobox: The non-free rationale needs to be expanded or removed for WP:NFCC, how does it help the reader understand the topic? It doesn't so removed, unless there is a big reason
    • The poppy image is definitely crucial, but I suppose the one in the infobox doesn't explain much. Maybe there is a better frame that could be used, such as Blackadder pretending to be mad. Removed for now.
  • Lede: Link sitcom to television comedy instead per WP:OVERLINK
    • Done.
  • Lede: Where is the episode plot summary in the lede per WP:LEDE
    • Have expanded a bit.
  • Production: Move image to right side for MOS:IMAGELOCATION
    • Done, and moved poppy image to "Themes".
  • Themes: "Blackadder, Baldrick and George discuss the futility of war—George mentions the Christmas truce of 1914, in which the belligerents stopped fighting to play football—and their impending fate. Death and bereavement are prominent in the episode: George lists the members of the "Trinity Tiddlers", the group that he signed up with, and realises that he is the only one of them still alive; this is paralleled in Baldrick's pets, who have all died." whole paragraph has no references as such
    • Is this not seen as citing the episode itself, as with the plot summary? It describes, while the next paragraph analyses. I have removed "Death and bereavement are prominent in the episode:", to allow the reader to draw their own conclusions.
  • Reception: The episode's airing and ratings need to be mentioned in reception, for info and WP:LEDE
    • Unfortunately, programmes which aired in Britain in the 80s do not have readily available viewing figures from BARB or the BBC. I have added a bit about the broadcast date and time to the beginning.
  • References: TV.com and worldwar1.com are not a high-quality sources, and needs to be replaced
    • Both removed.
  • References: Don't use mixed date formats
    • Fixed.
  • References: Linking problems
    • Have tried to fix, unsure if any remain.

TBrandley 04:08, 30 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Addressed inline. ajmint (talkedits) 08:57, 30 September 2012 (UTC)Reply
Great. Article looks good now. Pass. Well done! TBrandley 16:22, 30 September 2012 (UTC)Reply