Wikipedia

Talk:Road to ... (Family Guy)

(Redirected from Talk:Road to... (Family Guy))
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Phoub327 in topic incorrectly attributed direction
Learn more about this page
Good articleRoad to ... (Family Guy) has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 11, 2010Articles for deletionNo consensus
December 13, 2010Good article nomineeNot listed
March 1, 2011Good article nomineeNot listed
August 24, 2011Good article nomineeListed
October 7, 2011Good topic candidatePromoted
September 14, 2013Good topic removal candidateKept
September 25, 2016Good topic removal candidateDemoted
Current status: Good article

GA Review

edit
Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Road to... (Family Guy)/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: DustFormsWords (talk) 03:04, 22 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I intend to conduct a Good Article Review of this article. I will start by adding a framework listing the GA criteria, and then assess against each criteria. In all but the best and worst articles I expect to find at least minor ways that the article should be improved prior to getting the tick. It may take me anywhere from a couple of hours to several days to complete the initial review, depending on RL commitments. Each criterion will be marked with a red cross until I have assessed that the article meets or exceeds the criterion, at which time the cross will be changed to a green tick. When the initial review is complete I will let the nominator know via a message on his or her talk page. Thank you for your patience.

  1. Well-written:
    2. (a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct;  
    • The article was in need of a basic copyedit (unclosed quotes, variant spellings, incomplete sentences, etc). I have performed some of this but please remember that nominators are expected to do this themselves prior to nominating for GA. Please perform a copyedit of the article.
    • Throughout the article, Road to is variously formatted as Road to..., Road to, "Road To", "Road to" and others. Please pick a consistent format (ideally Road to... per the article name) and apply it throughout the article.
    • Individual episode titles should be non-italics, in quotes, eg "8 Simple Rules for Buying My Teenage Daughter". However in the article some episode titles appear in italics, and one occurrence of "8 Simple Rules for Buying My Teenage Daughter" has neither quotes nor italics. Please ensure a consistent format.
    • "Stewie Griffin, and his anthropomorphic dog, Brian" - Not sure that Brian belongs to Stewie, per se, rather than Peter or the Griffin family as a whole. Possible reword to "Stewie Griffin and anthropomorphic dog Brian".
    • "in some foreign, supernatural or science fiction location not familiar to the show's normal location in Quahog, Rhode Island." - This is an awkward sentence construction (particularly "not familiar to"). Can I suggest instead "going on a road trip through a foreign or fantastic location"? Or alternatively a clearer and less verbose phrasing of your preference.
    • "The episodes are known for featuring elaborate musical numbers" - This also comes under "words to watch" in criterion 1b. "Are known for" is vague and unecyclopaedic (known by who?). This should read "are notable for". Or alternatively, use the simpler phrasing, "The episodes feature elaborate musical numbers".
    • "Road to... episodes typically consist of three parts: a series of" - Okay, you say three parts and then have a colon. This implies that what comes after the colon will be a list of the three parts. However, instead after the colon is a list of two things (credits, segment in Quohog) which in fact together only constitute the first part. Consider changing to "consist of three parts. The first part is a series of" or some other phrasing that makes this clearer.
    • "Povenmire left Family Guy [...] to create his own series, entitled Phineas and Ferb, which has since been nominated for six Emmy Awards and one Emmy nomination win" - You don't need any of this sentence after "Phineas and Ferb". It's not remotely relevant to this article what awards Phineas and Ferb may have won. Please edit in the interests of conciseness.
    • "It was written by Patrick Meighan who had written..." - The "it" here currently seems to refer to Phineas and Ferb. Bearing in mind the comments about the preceding sentence above, please reword to make it clear that Meighan wrote Road to Rupert, not Phineas and Ferb.
    (b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation;  
    • List incorporation - Per the MOS for embedded lists, you should make an effort to introduce the list of episodes with prose to explain its context. This could take the form of a paragraph under the "Episodes" heading and before the list, saying something like, "To date, there are six Road To... episodes, being one in each of the 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th seasons of Family Guy. The following list provides details of the episodes." Or something similar. It doesn't have to be long, it just needs to explain what the list is listing.
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    3. (a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;  
    (b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);  
    (c) it contains no original research.  
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    4. (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;  
    (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).  
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.  
    The article appears to fairly present all significant viewpoints about these episodes. My own searches have failed to uncover viewpoints in reliable sources that are not represented here.
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.  
    The article does not change significantly from day to day and does not appear to be the subject of unresolved disputes.
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    7. (a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content;  
    File:FGRoadToEurope.jpg - I am not satisfied with the licensing on this image. Firstly, "dvdrip" is not a sufficiently clear explanation of the source. Secondly, I am not sure you can justify that this screenshot "contributes by giving a quick snapshot of the main idea behind the episode", as the article does not deal with just one episode, and while Road To... episodes often feature musical numbers, I am not sure that depicting one significantly contributes to an encyclopaedic understanding of the topic. You may want to look at the licensing for the previous incarnation of this image as it is substantially better worded.
    (b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.  
    Images are relevant and appropriately captioned. (Minor points - FGRoadToEurope.jpg's caption should not end in a full stop as it is not a complete sentence. Also the picture of Dan Povenmire doesn't really need to talk about Phineas and Ferb - it's not very relevant to this article.)

Overview - This review is not complete. However, after wading halfway through the article and encountering an overwhelming number of basic copyediting problems (uncapitalised sentences, missing quote marks, missing italicisation, and others), I am going to halt here and request that the nominator conduct a copyedit before I continue the review. Nominators are required to copyedit articles prior to nominating them for Good Article, but this does not appear to have occurred here. I am happy to continue the review once a copyedit has occurred. Please let me know on my talk page when you are ready for me to continue. - DustFormsWords (talk) 01:56, 23 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

  • Overview - Despite messages left on the talk page of the nominator, there has been no response to my review and no work has occurred on the article since the review was halted above. Accordingly I am left with no choice but to fail this article. Please feel free to renominate at a later stage when a copyedit has occurred. - DustFormsWords (talk) 01:52, 1 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

edit
Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Road to... (Family Guy)/GA3. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: GRAPPLE X 00:13, 24 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:  
    A few gripes to fix.
    Refs 2-7 could probably be dropped or moved elsewhere. A clump of six refs in the first line of the lead looks a bit too much. The fact being supported is evident enough from the article that you can get away with it as is.
    I'm also not sold on using the ellipses every time you refer to the title - I think when you use phrases like "Road to... episodes", you could drop it and go with "Road to episodes".
    "the episodes were used to showcase special animation" -> "the episodes were used to showcase different animation techniques"
    "Phineas and Ferb" should be italicised.
    "entitled" means "deserving of". You should be using "titled".
    Episode titles should not be in italics, and should have quotation marks around the titles, such as "Brian Goes Back to College". Television series' names should be italicised.
    "As a result, series regular Greg Colton" -> ditch the comma there.
    There's no real sense of uniformity in how to refer to the series. Sometimes it's Road to, others Road to... and sometimes you use quotation marks as well. Any style works but use one throughout.
    "The episode was the first Road show to be produced and broadcast in high-definition, the first to be a full hour" -> "the first to be a full hour long/in length" (either works)
    "In IGN's top ten Stewie and Brian's Greatest Adventures" -> If "top ten" is part of the title, then capitalise it; if not, then replace it with a more explanatory phrase, like "top ten list of Stewie and Brian's Greatest Adventures".
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:  
    MOS seems fine.
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:  
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:  
    C. No original research:  
    Apart from the over-citation in the first line, the references are grand.
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:  
    B. Focused:  
    Scope seems fine.
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:  
    Neutrality is fine.
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:  
    Article is stable.
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:  
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:  
    Two commons images are fine, but the rationale for File:FGRoadToEurope.jpg needs seeing to. It's an exact copy of the rationale for the relevant episode. You'll need to explain why it's fair use to use it as an example of the series of episodes, and why it stands as a representative image for themes present in several episodes.
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:  
    Going to stick this on hold for now, until the issues for 1A and 6A are dealt with.
Your concerns have been addressed. Gage (talk) 02:23, 24 August 2011 (UTC)Reply
I see you removed the image in question - it was fine to keep it, you just needed to rewrite the rationale so it was specific to the article and not a copy of its other use. However, the changes are grand, so I'm ready to pass this one. Well done. GRAPPLE X 02:39, 24 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

What season?

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

it was titled "Road to the Multiverse" and it was produced in the seventh eighth season. In what season? Seventh or eight? What'sGoingOn (talk) 05:26, 22 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Road to ... (Family Guy). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:18, 19 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

incorrectly attributed direction

edit
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

for road to Europe it says it's directed by Roy allen, however it's actually directed by Dan povelmire, there might be other inconsistencies in this episode table Phoub327 (talk) 07:03, 7 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Road_to_..._(Family_Guy)&oldid=1205078977"