Wikipedia

Talk:Phineas and Ferb's Quantum Boogaloo/GA1

< Talk:Phineas and Ferb's Quantum Boogaloo
Latest comment: 14 years ago by SuperFlash101 in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago34 comments2 people in discussion

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

Reviewer: Try to address these line by line. Here we go! — Hunter Kahn (c) 18:57, 10 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Lead:

Plot summary:

  • First paragraph: "...where the boys are leave before Linda can see them." I assuming you mean "where the boys are leaving", but I didn't want to presume since I haven't seen the episode...
  • Second paragraph "Professor Onassis, the inventor of the time machine, arrives in the newly created machine soon after..." I'm sorry, this is probably my own stupidity, not a problem with the prose. lol. I'm a big confused by this, because you write "arrives in the newly created machine" as if there was a previous reference to the fact that a new machine was being created that we were already aware of, but I don't see any reference to that in the first paragraph. Can you either straighten me out on this, or maybe try rewording that sentence?
  • Also second paragraph: "However, in doing so, she accidentally leads to Perry, their pet who is secretly a suave secret agent, to be injured and his nemesis, Dr. Doofenshmirtz, to come out victorious in his evil scheme." Could you maybe break this into two sentences to make it flow easier? Something like: "But in doing so, she accidentally leads Perry, their pet who is secretly a suave secret agent, to become injured. As a result, Perry's nemesis, Dr. Doofenshmirtz, is victorious in his evil scheme." Also, is there a more specific description of how exactly he succeeds at this particular moment in the episode?
    • I broke it into two and explained what actually happened a bit better.
  • Still second paragraph: "...the world childproofs everything..." I'm guessing "...everything in the world becomes childproof..." would be better here, right? It's not the world that's actually doing the childproofing...
  • Third paragraph: "After one of them ceases to exists, the boys do..." I tripped over "the boys do". Do you mean "the boys fix the machine"?

Production:

  • First paragraph: "..., an episode co-founder Dan Povenmire "really liked."" This read awkwardly for me tagged onto the end of the sentence. Could you break it out into a second smaller sentence? Also, it might be better to simply paraphrase those two words than quote them as per WP:QUOTE...
  • Second paragraph: "The inclusion of the flashbacks to the pilot episode 'Rollercoaster'"... I'm assuming the flashback refers to the part in the plot summary where she goes back to them building the roller coaster. Although I think most readers would make that connection to, could you include here exactly what that reference is? Something like "The scenes in which Candace travels back to the Phineas and Ferb building a roller coaster are a reference to the pilot episode, in which..." etc etc and then link that to the "great fun" sentence?
  • Third paragraph:"The goal of the crew was to make sure everything stayed strong to a certain logical standpoint, which lead to several "surreal" conversations". I'd definitely suggest dropping the quotes from surreal on this one and just paraphrasing that word. There's seldom a need to quote a single word, and it will get away from the awkward double-citation after "surreal" and "conversations". However, if you choose to keep it in quotes, you need to cite who specifically said the word "surreal", as every quote needs to have a citation in the prose as well as in the reference...
  • Third paragraph: "that would that seemed complicated" I was just going to fix it myself, but I figured I'd let you choose whichever clause you wanted to use. ;)
  • Fourth paragraph: "Since "what Doofenshmirtz and Perry do interacts and effects what the boys are doing,"" Again, I'd suggest paraphrasing this, but it's just a suggestion. However, if you choose not to paraphrase it, you need to say who said it.
  • Fourth paragraph: "...felt that it was done "really well."" Again, I'd said drop the quotes, or add in who specifically said it was done "really well".'
  • Fourth paragraph: I'm not sure if irony has to be wikilinked, as per WP:OVERLINK. What do you think?

I'll finish the review later tonight. Nice work so far!!! — Hunter Kahn (c) 18:57, 10 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

  • Fifth paragraph: "...was originally written as a throwaway joke in the initial script for the episode..." "Originally written" and "initial script" strike me as redundant. Couldn't we just say "was originally written as a throwaway joke for the episode"?
  • Also fifth paragraph: "someone was curious about the line and Povenmire came up with an entire back story". I'm guessing we don't know who that someone is? Or at least what their involvement with the show is? (Writer, producer, etc?)
  • I'd remove the wikilink for e-mail in this fifth paragraph. Again, as per WP:OVERLINK...
  • Sixth paragraph: I'd also remove the wikilink to guest appearances, unless you feel really strongly about that one...
  • Sixth paragraph: "Stone researched Ashley Tisdale's performance as Candace on YouTube to better grasp the attention needed on the voice role." Unless I missed it, this is the first mention of Ashley Tisdale and there is no context as to who exactly she is. Could you add that?
  • ..."who is 'like [Stone's] little brother,'..." Can you toss in here that Stone is the one who said this?

Cultural references:

  • "Candace stealing the time machine to change something in the past, thus creating a dystopian future, is a parody of..." The source points out how similar this is to BTTF2 but doesn't say it was specifically written to be parodize it, does it? Could you maybe say "closely mirrors" instead of "is a parody of"?

Reception:

  • "In Kids 6-14, it outranked previous year's records by..." This is hardly a big deal, but should this be "record" or "records"?
  • "2,697 million" Can you change this to either "2.7 million" or "2,697,000"? The current wording makes it sound like 2,697,000,000. ;)

Very nice job! — Hunter Kahn (c) 01:05, 12 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! :) The Flash {talk} 21:27, 12 November 2009 (UTC)Reply


A good article is:

  1. Well-written: Prose is good, MOS is good.
  2. Factually accurate and verifiable: Sources are good, no original research.
  3. Broad in its coverage: Covers main aspects, no unneeded detail.
  4. Neutral: Yes.
  5. Stable: Yes.
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by images: Yes.

Nice job! Pass. — Hunter Kahn (c) 23:30, 12 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks again! :) The Flash {talk} 00:12, 13 November 2009 (UTC)Reply
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Phineas_and_Ferb%27s_Quantum_Boogaloo/GA1&oldid=1136242845"