Talk:Star Trek: Phase II/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: MWright96 (talk · contribs) 14:48, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Reviewing this article. MWright96 (talk) 14:48, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): (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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Background

• "Afterwards it saw success in broadcast syndication," - Afterward
• "Kaufman claimed that Paramount attributed this to the idea that science fiction fans wouldn't go see two films released so close together." - would not

Conception

• "At the time, TOS was being broadcast on 137 stations in the United States in syndication," - I think TOS should be spelt out for consistency
• The "s" in "radicalisation" should be a "z"

Crew and production design

• "He described his concerns saying that he didn't want to" - did not

Cancellation

• Delink NBC as it already link in the background sub-section

References

• No dead links

Not too many problems I found. On hold until issues are dealt with. MWright96 (talk) 18:57, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

@MWright96: Thanks - I've address all those issues. Thank you for doing the review. Miyagawa (talk) 19:27, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

@Miyagawa: Can now pass this article. MWright96 (talk) 19:45, 4 August 2016 (UTC)