Talk:The Mama Who Came to Dinner

Latest comment: 3 years ago by Soaper1234 in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
This review is transcluded from Talk:The Mama Who Came to Dinner/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Soaper1234 (talk · contribs) 13:56, 21 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hello. I plan on reviewing this article. It is my first GA review, so do bear with me. Expect comments in the coming days. Soaper1234 - talk 13:56, 21 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

You have responded to all your comments, so I am happy to give this article a pass. Well done! Soaper1234 - talk 14:11, 22 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Infobox and lead

edit
  • All looks fine to me.

Synopsis

edit

Production

edit
  • Do you have a source for the director, writers and producers?
  Done Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 00:31, 22 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
  • Clarify who Judy Winslow is as she has not been mentioned anywhere so far.
  Done Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 00:31, 22 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Reception

edit
  • Are the years for the different shows necessary?
  Done Removed. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 00:31, 22 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
  • Unlink Family Matters
  Done Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 00:31, 22 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
  • Remove "("What a Wonderful World" by Louis Armstrong)" - second mention of theme song so no need to clarify.
  Done Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 00:31, 22 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
  • "and to turn off their TVs after the song concluded" → "and then turn their television off".
  Done Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 00:31, 22 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

References

edit
  • Change |author= in references to |first= |last=.
  Done Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 00:31, 22 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
Reference #4 still needs changing. This can be done using |first1= |last1= |first2= |last2=. Soaper1234 - talk 10:10, 22 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Soaper1234: The issue has been fixed. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 12:28, 22 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Progress

edit
GA review
(see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):  
    b (citations to reliable sources):  
    c (OR):  
    d (copyvio and plagiarism):  
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):  
    b (focused):  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  6. 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:  

  ·   ·   ·  

Notes

edit