Talk:Search Committee/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ruby2010 (talk · contribs) 03:18, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

I'll review this one again in the next day or two. Ruby comment! 03:18, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

There are a number of things I mentioned in the previous review that you never applied to the article's improvement. For example, this interview with Paul Lieberstein would add a lot to the production section. You used a little from this one, but I see more you can add (like what B.J. Novak liked about the finale etc). Your cultural refs are pretty shoddy. Add more from the links I gave in the previous review! I'll wait til you act on these suggestions before reviewing further. As before, PLEASE respond here when you think you have finished making these edits, as I watchlist the review, NOT the article. Thanks, Ruby comment! 17:06, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

I believe I have fixed the problems NoD'ohnuts (talk) 22:07, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

More comments

• "In addition to appearing in the episode, Gervais contributed to the script.[5]" -> In addition to appearing in "Search Committee", Gervais contributed to the script.
• Mention Gervais is a producer of American series
• "Initially the guest stars were planned to be a secret, before all were revealed to the media" . Who revealed the guest stars to the media?
• "Lieberstein described the episode as "it's more than a montage. It's a number of scenes. We fit it in. We stuff it in".[6" Make clear Lieberstein is referring to the guest stars' scenes. Otherwise it just looks disjointed from the previous statements.
• This was the last episode to not feature Steve Carrel. Incorporate this part of the Paul Lieberstein interview ([1]) to article:

What was the feeling around the set the first week after Steve Carell's departure?

It was weird. It felt weird around here. The last week with Steve had been so emotional that it really felt like ... it was just very odd to be here without him. It was like oh, life goes on, OK. I guess we'll just keep doing our jobs. But it didn't take long for the mood to switch to kind of this very hopeful, excited and anticipatory feeling that anything could happen now. And that turned out to be very creatively exciting for everyone.

Where does that feeling come from?

Well, we had come to understand what an episode is with Michael, you know. And we played a lot of them -- we played about 150 of them. I think he got to episode 149. So it's a little bit different when you don't have someone taking the majority of the lines for an episode. When you don't have the show centered around a buffoon who tends to make a bad decision and then spends the rest of the episode trying to dig his way out of something. It was kind of a feeling that we get to do something new again, that we are kind of reinventing the show a little. And granted, not much. It's the same people that you've seen before, for years and years. It's just someone's role, I guess, is a little slightly different when the show is centered around them.

• There's still more from that interview that I would incorporate into an episode article were I the article writer (I wish my Fringe episodes had that kind of interview detail!)

• It mostly features several things about previous episodes NoD'ohnuts (talk) 01:10, 20 October 2011 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts

• You have not "fixed [all] the problems" by the way. The cultural references section looks awful right now. Add more to it (I provided useful links in the last GA review, and I know there are many more suitable reviews that mention things said in the episode.)

*Thats the only cultural reference the links you sent me have NoD'ohnuts (talk) 01:10, 20 October 2011 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts

• If you'd actually looked you'd see there's more:

• A.V. Club and EW: mentions of Sesame Street

• "I'm probably just another Porky’s baby"
• "Um, how do I know that Robert is gay? He liked my Facebook photos at three in the morning"
• "Aren’t there some things that you really want to like but just can’t seem to like it? Like Mad Men? Or football?"

• OfficeTally: Phyllis: "It was a big year for babies. Porky's had come out". Erin: "I'm sure I was just another Porky's baby. But why not find out?"

• Angela: "It's a little flashy. I mean, what am I, Naomi Judd?"
• Ryan: Let me guess what you want, Pam. Rachael Ray? The ladies of The View"?

References

It's The Huffington Post (wikilink it too)

It's Variety (wikilink it)

Wikilink all publishers that have articles on Wikipedia (IGN etc).

As before, I'll wait to add more after you have addressed above comments. Ruby comment! 17:19, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

I believe I have edited the problems to the article, although I might have missed a few NoD'ohnuts (talk) 05:16, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Still more cultural refs to add. Ruby comment! 06:04, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

How about now? NoD'ohnuts (talk) 01:11, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

• Plot is still much to long
• Explain more about David Brent (i.e. that was the name of his character on The Office etc)
• Weird is spelled wrong, and the sentence needs to be reworded
• also allowed... also allowed (sloppy)
• couldn't -> could not Ruby comment! 05:44, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

I've fixed those, although I couldn't condense the plot section completely, although it was an hour long episode NoD'ohnuts (talk) 01:49, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

After my own edits, I believe the article has now reached the GA criteria. Pass. Ruby comment! 03:27, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank You NoD'ohnuts (talk) 00:52, 30 October 2011 (UTC)