Talk:Snuffy's Parents Get a Divorce/GA1
Latest comment: 15 years ago by ThinkBlue in topic GA Review
GA Review
editArticle (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.
- Is it well written?
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- In the lead, "As a result, producers filmed an episode "Snuffy's Parents Get a Divorce"[2]", the comma should come before the source.
- Check.
- In the lead, "As a result, producers filmed an episode "Snuffy's Parents Get a Divorce"[2]", the comma should come before the source.
- B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
- In the lead, it would be best if "Sesame Street" was linked once, per here. In the Test results section, "Staff writer Norman Stiles was assigned to the script, which the Children's Television Workshop scheduled to air 10 April 1992", since the article is not international, you might want to fix the date setting, per here. Same section, link "Big Bird" once. Same section, italicize "Sesame Street News Flash", per here.
- Half-check.
- In the lead, it would be best if "Sesame Street" was linked once, per here. In the Test results section, "Staff writer Norman Stiles was assigned to the script, which the Children's Television Workshop scheduled to air 10 April 1992", since the article is not international, you might want to fix the date setting, per here. Same section, link "Big Bird" once. Same section, italicize "Sesame Street News Flash", per here.
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- References 8, 11, 12, and 14 are dead links. In the Test results section, "The final episode addressed the advisors' concerns via a conversation in which Gordon reassures Elmo, Big Bird, and Telly that "Just because parents have an argument, or get upset with each other, doesn't mean they're getting a divorce... Or that they don't love each other anymore." He also reassured Snuffy and his sister Alice that it's not their fault, "No, not even if you spill something", the source should be mentioned after the quote has concluded, per here and here. The link titles in References 8, 11, 12, and 14 are not supposed to be in all capitals, per here. Also, Reference 23 needs Publisher info., accessdate, etc.
- Half-check.
- References 8, 11, 12, and 14 are dead links. In the Test results section, "The final episode addressed the advisors' concerns via a conversation in which Gordon reassures Elmo, Big Bird, and Telly that "Just because parents have an argument, or get upset with each other, doesn't mean they're getting a divorce... Or that they don't love each other anymore." He also reassured Snuffy and his sister Alice that it's not their fault, "No, not even if you spill something", the source should be mentioned after the quote has concluded, per here and here. The link titles in References 8, 11, 12, and 14 are not supposed to be in all capitals, per here. Also, Reference 23 needs Publisher info., accessdate, etc.
- 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):
- Does Reference 16 cover all this ---> "Not everyone in the production shared Stone's interest. Executive producer Dulcy Singer vetoed the idea in 1990, before it reached development. While she felt complex social matters should be discussed on the series, she felt the issue was irrelevant to lower socio-economic groups; the initial target audience of Sesame Street was inner city and financially disadvantaged families"? If so, it might be best to add the source next to the statement.
- C. It contains no original research:
- D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Is it neutral?
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- Is it stable?
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!
- Pass or Fail:
-- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 16:49, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- I have asked for a second opinion. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 22:24, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Second opinion
editOverall, the article looks good. It's nicely sourced and written. However, I have some concerns.
- Is the lead supposed to have that many citations in it? I guess considering the subject matter, and the way it's presented, this could be an exception.
- Some paragraphs have only one sentence. Are you unable to combine them into other paragraphs?
Those are my concerns with the article. Otherwise, it looks great! CarpetCrawler (talk) 05:50, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
Per the discussion between ThinkBlue and I
editWe will put this article on hold for seven days. After my concerns are addressed, we ask that you send us a message on our talkpages. Then we will most surely pass this article. Thanks, good work and good luck! CarpetCrawler (talk) 22:20, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
- I have one concern. Reference 23 is missing Publisher info., an accessdate, date, etc. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 14:52, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
- The seven days have been up, and with consultation with CarpetCrawler, I've decided to fail the article. If the one comment above can be addressed, then the article may be renominated for GA. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 20:23, 29 March 2009 (UTC)