Talk:Trials and Tribble-ations/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Matthew R Dunn (talk · contribs) 13:11, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm afraid I'm going to quick fail this, because the article is, I'll be honest, crap according to the good article criteria, especially with criteria two and three. There are only two cited references throughout the article, and nothing in the prose beyond the lead section is cited. The notes section is not backed up by citations and hence seems to me like original research and trivia. The plot section is inadequate, and there is nothing on production (how the episode was coneived, developed, written, filmed, etc) or reception (ratings, awards and nominations, controversies if any, and critical reviews—what did critics think of it?). If you want the article to pass GA I suggest you start by expanding the plot a little, adding productions and reception notes that are referenced, and expand the lead section to summarise the entire article (see for example Yesterday's Enterprise, a Next Generation episode, it should make for a suitable guideline for Star Trek episodes), peer review it, and then you may renominate. Thank you. -- Matthew RD 13:11, 10 November 2011 (UTC)