Talk:The Circle (American TV series) season 1

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Circle (American season 1)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Adamstom.97 (talk · contribs) 03:54, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

While I am familiarising myself with game show articles for Talk:Big Brother 21 (American season)/GA1 I may as well have a look at this article as well. Back soon. - adamstom97 (talk) 03:54, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

This article is struggling to meet the GA criteria of broad coverage in my opinion. The production and reception sections just don't have a whole lot of content. I am willing to place this review on hold to give you time to try expand the article with any other details you can find. There is definitely more to add to the reception section since there are 15 reviews listed at Rotten Tomatoes that can be used. Let me know once you are ready for me to take another look. - adamstom97 (talk) 01:00, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@Adamstom.97: There is plenty of information in the production section from an outside reader's perspective. This article was split into The Circle (American TV series) and this article after the TV series one was nominated for GA. However, since this article contained more of the original content, I decided to leave this one with the GA nom. There is more information on the previous article if readers are interested. If possible, it would be nice for feedback to give advice on what information should be on which article. As for the reception section, I will work on adding more reviews and better organizing it. Jayab314 18:04, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

It's looking better now. If you let me know once you have added some more content to the reception section then I'll come back and do a full review of the article. - adamstom97 (talk) 22:43, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Status query

adamstom97, Jayab314, it's been more than a month since the last post here and edits to the article. Where does this stand? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:56, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

@BlueMoonset: I'm waiting on Adamstom.97 to respond. Jayab314 17:08, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay, I got caught up with some other things. I have added a full review of the article below with some outstanding issues. - adamstom97 (talk) 05:14, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Full review

• It would be good to mention the host in the production section, then the info will not need to be referenced in the lead.
• I think the lead can be reworked a bit. The first two sentences give basic info, then the next two sentences give the premise but worded in an out-of-date way, then you talk about future seasons before discussing the results of this one. I think it would be much improved with a general info and premise paragraph, a paragraph discussing the production and results, and a paragraph discussing the reception and future seasons. Try to make sure the lead summarises the whole article.
• The single sentence paragraph in the casting section should be combined with the following paragraph.
• There is some contradictory information in the filming section. Did it take 15 days or a month to film?
• I think there can be some clean-up done with the article's references, especially to make sure web sources are archived and available for future readers.

In general I think the coverage is looking better now and the article makes good use of visuals and charts to break down the season. Have a go at these points and let me know if you have any concerns or questions. - adamstom97 (talk) 05:14, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

A note that per MOS:LEADLENGTH (a part of MOS:LEAD, and therefore part of the GA criteria), an article as short as this one (under 10,000 characters) should have a lead of one or two paragraphs, so three would be excessive, though it should indeed summarize the article. BlueMoonset (talk) 12:37, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

The three paragraphs was more of a structural suggestion than a length suggestion. I was just trying to give an idea of how the lead could better reflect the article. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:55, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

@Jayab314: Hey, making sure that you are aware of my comments here. - adamstom97 (talk) 04:49, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

@Jayab314: Hey again, over a week has passed without progress on the review. I would like to get a result in the next week if possible, so hopefully you can address my concerns within the next seven days or I will have to fail the review. - adamstom97 (talk) 22:53, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Yet another week has passed with no further activity, so I am going to have to Fail this review. Sorry. I do think the article isn't far off and if you wanted to address the rest of my concerns and renominate then I would be happy to help complete the next review attempt. Best of luck, adamstom97 (talk) 02:14, 12 June 2020 (UTC)