Talk:Amish Guy/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 19:34, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

I'll give this a look-over. J Milburn (talk) 19:34, 24 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't really see what the lead image is adding. There's really not any kind of entitlement to illustrate episode articles with non-free content.
 * "until they are able to fix their car at a mechanic" A mechanic is the person who does the fixing, not a place at which a family does their own fixing
 * "The two families conflict," Which two families?
 * "It was first announced at the 2011 San Diego Comic-Con International. This episode marked the lowest Nielsen Rating for Family Guy since 2002." Both good factoids for the lead, but they're out of place at the end of the lead.
 * Wikipedia articles are not suitable references, and that closing fact is not referenced in the main body of the article.
 * Six Flags is a company, not a park
 * "because he is too overweight, he becomes disappointed. Peter's two friends Joe and Quagmire then convince him to go on a diet in order to be able to ride the coaster. He is unable to lose any weight however, and simply decides to wear a girdle instead. The family then travels to Ohio in order to ride a new roller coaster titled The Holocaust. Able to ride the roller coaster, Peter gets on the ride. Unfortunately, the roller coaster is unable to make it up the first hill, and falls under Peter's weight." This whole doesn't read too well.
 * "A battle ensues, with both sides equally matched." Not quite clear what is meant here.
 * "The episode was directed by series regular John Holmquist, shortly after the conclusion of the ninth production season, in his first episode of the season." This doesn't make sense
 * Does it really matter when these individuals became involved with the show?
 * The "Production and development" section doesn't really seem to say anything about production or development; it's just a list of people involved with the episode and other things that they've done.
 * "The episode also acquired a 2.8/6 rating in the 18–49 demographic, beating The Simpsons, Allen Gregory, American Dad!, in addition to significantly edging out Allen Gregory and American Dad! in total viewership." Allen Gregory and American Dad!.
 * "Reviews of the episode were mostly mixed to positive, calling the storyline "mildly funny, but it was an expected over-the-top direction that didn't have many jokes that worked."" All reviews called it that? The line does not make sense
 * "If I didn't think the funnies lived up to their nickname, I did what everyone does with a newspaper. I threw it away. [...] Then I read the strip again the next day, as if the previous one hadn't existed. That's how I tried to watch this episode, paying some attention to the Griffins in Amish country, but mostly isolating each joke setup, figuring out what I liked, and then moving on to the next one." I'm not sure how much this very long quote is adding to the article
 * "He concluded his review of the episode by giving the episode a grade of B-." Unwarranted mouthful
 * When you're referring to only two reviews, I'm not sure you can really make a claim like "Reviews of the episode were mostly mixed to positive". That implies you've looked at a half dozen.
 * References seem appropriate for the subject, and are formatted well.

I'm question whether there's really enough material to support a good article on this subject, but, either way, the writing is a little poor in places. Ideally, I'd like to see more on the production of the episode, but, at the very very least, I'd like to see the writing improve before this is ready for GA status. J Milburn (talk) 19:57, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Next to no progress has been made, despite the fact that I reviewed this over a week ago. As such, I am failing the article. When you nominate articles with no intention of fixing the problems, you're wasting everyone's time. I am failing the article, and I advise you do not renominate until the issues have been sorted, get your articles into a better state of repair before nomination in the future and, please, if you're not going to act on the suggestions, do not nominate. J Milburn (talk) 22:14, 3 July 2012 (UTC)