Talk:The Return of Harmony/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: TBrandley (talk · contribs) 05:33, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Um... ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bruce Campbell (talk • contribs)

Doing. TBrandley 01:41, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

• Image doesn't pass WP:NFCC, as it doesn't help reader understand topic itself. Expand rationale or remove please.

Actually the file page for the image offers a rationale; "To illustrate a poignant scene in the episode (infobox). The episode focuses on the six main ponies attempts to locate the Elements of Harmony and eradicate Discord. The screenshot not only illustrates the main characters, it also illustrates what the Elements of Harmony are and how they work. In addition, the art style of the episode was praised by one reviewer and this screenshot, of the climax of the episode, helps illustrate the animation style." If this isn't still appropriate I'll just remove it, not a big deal either way. Bruce Campbell (talk) 22:24, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

• Where are the production codes or running time referenced?
• household rating should be Nielsen household rating, which should be linked

Done. Bruce Campbell (talk) 22:24, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

• Direct quotes, as seen in plot, need to be referenced

Changed all instances of direct quotes to just general prose. Bruce Campbell (talk) 00:55, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• Link The Hub in first mention, per WP:UNDERLINK
• "Executive Producer" and "Consulting Producer" shouldn't be in capitals, per MOS:CAPS
• "The episodes were the final episodes" to "The episodes were the final to"
• "%" should be "percent"
• "Many reviews and articles" should be "Many critics", cause they said so
• Don't "shout" in reference titles
• Ref. 5 is missing accessdate
• Categories should be sorted in alphabetical order

All simple enough changes; done. Bruce Campbell (talk) 22:24, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

• I see some issues at the article's peer review page, they weren't addressed, but now do need to be, please fix them

Indeed; some very helpful comments, and I believe I have applied them where necessary (some were already done). Bruce Campbell (talk) 22:24, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

TBrandley 17:01, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

I think I hit all your points, and if not instruct me further. Bruce Campbell (talk) 22:24, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Looks fine now. Passing. TBrandley 22:40, 25 October 2012 (UTC)