Talk:The Giggle/GA1

GA Review

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

Nominator: Pokelego999 (talk · contribs) 03:52, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: DoctorWhoFan91 (talk · contribs) 07:37, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

I'll take the review for this one. It's very well written, so I don't think it will have many, if any, issues. I'll list the issues in around half an hour. Best of Luck. — DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 07:37, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Plot

• head of UNIT → Head of UNIT/UNIT head or something similar (if the grammar seems correct to you, leave it be)  Done

Ratings

• Use another reference for the overnight ratings(maybe the TV Zone one linked in the next sentence). Keep the DWN one for now, bcs AI is only given there  Done
• Replace the DWN reference for consolidated ratings, with a more realiable one(perhaps the Barb Audiences one used on the series article page)  Done

Remarks

• Just mentioning CultBox and Doctor Who News Page and other similar websites, in case there are issues later regarding them, so that the review isn't called into question. Doesn't need any changes at the given moment

Result

Great work done on the page, I have checked it three times and these are the only issues I could find. Good Luck. — DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 08:02, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

@DoctorWhoFan91 I've made the requested changes. Let me or Oli know if any more work needs to be done on the article. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 18:34, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

It's fine this way too, but can either of you add another reference (just link the TV Zone or Radio Times one) to the overnight ratings alongside DWN, I feel like that would be better. I'll pass the article in around twelve hours either way(prefer not to at the moment, as I think I should let the review to atleast be active for 24 hours, plus I'm on mobile), User:Pokelego999, User:OlifanofmrTennant - DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 20:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

@DoctorWhoFan91 Done. I've removed the AI for now since there's no source I can find for it for the time being but I did add the Radio Times reference to back up the TV Zone source. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 20:44, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Wow, that was quick and proactive, informally passing for now, will do so formally in 8-10 hours. Congratulations to both of you - DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 20:54, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Commenting to say that regarding the change from 'head of UNIT' to 'Head of UNIT', this goes against MOS:JOBTITLES. I undid the change citing this policy but I have been reverted, which is why I'm adding this comment here instead. JustAnotherCompanion (talk) 21:35, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Hmmm, can you or someone else change it back. I'll do so myself, mention that in the edit summary, and then pass it formally in twenty minutes if no one else does. - DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 05:28, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Changed it, and mentioned why and that I'm the reviwer. - DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 06:05, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

The article meets all the GA criteria completely and is passed. Very well done and Congratulations, User:Pokelego999, and User:OlifanofmrTennant, the article was very well written and passed easily — DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 06:05, 25 August 2024 (UTC)