Talk:The Uncertainty Principle (The Spectacular Spider-Man)/GA1

GA Review

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

My comments are below...

Lead

• Like in my GAN review for "Reaction", I'd rather see the broadcast date and network moved up to the first paragraph, unless you strongly object...

• Unlike that one, though, I just don't think altering it'll work on this article. The current setup is quite fine IMO, and though I understand the airdate and such is important, structurally I believe altering it would just screw it up. The Flash ^{I am Jack's complete lack of surprise} 02:08, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
  • I thought the solution you did in "Reaction" worked quite well there, and it would make it only less consistent not to do it here and at the other Spidey episodes. It feels like here the first paragraph could be the first sentence and the date/network, the second graph could be the episode description and the Hopps/Bullock research stuff, then the third paragraph could be the part about the Goblin storyline and the rest. Like I said, this isn't a dealbreaker for me, but unless you insist on it, I still feel it's the best solution... — Hunter Kahn 02:21, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
    • Alright then, done. The Flash ^{I am Jack's complete lack of surprise} 02:31, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Plot

• "...and notices him by his friend Harry's apartment. Sneaking in..." I found this transition between sentences awkward. First he notices him by the apartment, and then he says "sneaking in", as if he is in the apartment. Does he see the Goblin entering the apartment? If so, I'd change it to reflect that...

•  Done The Flash ^{I am Jack's complete lack of surprise} 02:08, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

• "...but he leaves before he can notice him..." This also read awkwardly for me. Could you reword it a bit? Maybe just changing one of the "he"s to a last name would do the trick...

•  Done The Flash ^{I am Jack's complete lack of surprise} 02:08, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

• Like in "Reaction", the wikilink to Liz Allen doesn't seem to be correct.

•  Done The Flash ^{I am Jack's complete lack of surprise} 02:08, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

• "While Goblin breaks into OsCorp when Norman is talking with investor..." This confuses me. At least in this point in the series/episode, aren't we supposed to believe that Norman is the Goblin? I'd also break the first long sentence in this paragraph into two shorter ones.

•  Done At this point, we actually are unsure if he is or not. The Flash ^{I am Jack's complete lack of surprise} 02:08, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

• "The next day, Jameson learns..." Is this a reference to John Jameson, or J. Jonah Jameson? If it's the latter, could you add the full name, since it right now immediately follows a reference to John Jameson and appears to be referring to him.

•  Done The Flash ^{I am Jack's complete lack of surprise} 02:08, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

• The sentence that ends with "be the Goblin without raising suspicion" cites both an IGN review and' the episode "Final Curtain". Since everything you write here is covered by the IGN review, I don't think the "Final Curtain" citation is necessary and would suggest removing it.

•  Done The Flash ^{I am Jack's complete lack of surprise} 02:08, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Reception

• I think you're sort of reaching with this image. I'm not sure it serves the article all that well, and would suggest replacing it with a quote box or something...

•  Done The Flash ^{I am Jack's complete lack of surprise} 02:08, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

• The first paragraph links to an Eric Goldman (IGN) review of "Catalysts", not "The Uncertainty Principle."

•  Done The Flash ^{I am Jack's complete lack of surprise} 02:08, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I'll place this on hold for now. Thanks! — Hunter Kahn 01:34, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the review! :) The Flash ^{I am Jack's complete lack of surprise} 02:08, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

GA Checklist

GA review (see here for criteria)

---

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Nice work! That's a pass! — Hunter Kahn 03:15, 18 February 2010 (UTC)