Talk:Bart's Friend Falls in Love/GA1

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

Overall, the article looks good. No major problems stand out, although more about the Production would be nice if the information is available. As I read through (probably a section at a time or so), my concerns are:


 * The lead does not summarize the plot of the episode. I think something should be said about Bart bringing about the end of the relationship.
 * Done.  The left orium  16:03, 11 September 2009 (UTC)


 * rather than repeating "is a parody of the film" in the lead, it might be better to change one to "parodies the film". I'm not too concerned about this, though.
 * Done 03  md  22:40, 10 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Milhouse and Samantha just sit around and kiss, if I remember correctly, so calling it "making out" (especially given the definition if one clicks on the wikilink) is a bit deceptive.
 * Reworded. 03  md  22:40, 10 September 2009 (UTC)


 * The connection to Casablanca should be explained for those that are not familiar with the film and don't understand the parallel.
 * I can't find a reliable source that discusses the connection. This is the best we can get.
 * Then this is all that can be said without resorting to original research. GaryColemanFan (talk) 02:31, 12 September 2009 (UTC)


 * "Nate Meyers of Digitally Obsessed gave the episode a 4.5 rating" - out of what? I also think the site is called digitallyOBSESSED, although the capitalization of a website name isn't a big deal in a GA review.
 * Clarified the rating but left name of website. 03  md  22:40, 10 September 2009 (UTC)


 * No title is given for the final reference in the "References" section.
 * I'm not sure what title it can be given as episodes of The Hours do not have specific names.
 * I suppose you're right. GaryColemanFan (talk) 02:31, 12 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I can't see any source information for the picture of John Williams (aside from a mention that it is from Wikipedia).
 * User:Nationalparks took the picture and uploaded it to en.wikipedia.org under the CC-BY-SA license. User:Maddox then moved it to Commons. -- The  left orium  15:56, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Now that I look at it now, it has adequate sourcing information. GaryColemanFan (talk) 02:31, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * This doesn't follow the same format as other Simpsons articles (a "Production and allusions" section rather than separate sections for "Production" and "Cultural references"). Is there a reason for this?
 * Separated "Production and allusions" into two sections titled "Production" and "Cultural references". 03  md  22:40, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I reverted it back to one section. The reason is that the two last paragraphs in the section are a mix of information about production and cultural references and they work better together.  The left orium  15:51, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I figured that might be the case. Not a problem. GaryColemanFan (talk) 02:31, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Other than that, everything looks fine. I will place this nomination on hold for one week. Any responses can be left here, as I have this page on my watchlist. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 16:28, 10 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I have been working on a number of Simpsons articles so decided to hop on board to help with the article. 03  md  22:40, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the review! :)  The left orium  16:03, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks good. It meets the GA criteria, so I am promoting it. GaryColemanFan (talk) 02:31, 12 September 2009 (UTC)