Talk:Days of Our Lives/GA1

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


 * Well-written
 * Lead section.
 * Section is too short. Please see WP:LEAD for more information.
 * In lead sentence of second paragraph, as of when did Days of our Lives become the third longest running soap opera in the United States? Put an "As of" template to clarify.
 * See also listed in the various sections of the article.
 * Put all of this in a separate "See also" section.
 * Storyline section. Best-remembered stories subsections.
 * In last sentence of this subsection, "infamous" is WP:WEASEL. Remove.
 * Cast section
 * In the fourth sentence of the lead paragraph, change "...on February 3, 2010[41] (though she last appeared on the show in December 2007)." to "...on February 3, 2010 though she last appeared on the show in December 2007.[41]"
 * Broadcast history section.
 * In last sentence of last paragraph, a [citation needed] is listed. Please find citation for this.
 * Opening titles sequences and theme song section.
 * Days of our Lives opening theme is not shown in the printed version of this article. Is there a way to put this in? If so, do it.
 * Appearances in pop culture section.


 * Factually accurate and verifiable
 * No references listed in the "Appearances in pop culture" section.
 * Use WP:CITE and WP:CITET for the References section listed. Formatting of references needs to be consistent.
 * Link not found for References 2, 28, 30, and 49.
 * WP:AGF assumed for References 9, 10, and 11.
 * Combine the following references 28 and 30, 34 and 38, and 4, 44, and 47.


 * Broad
 * Covers all aspects of the show, including outside of the United States. No issue.


 * Neutral
 * No issues.


 * Stable
 * Last edit was on 12 May 2010. No issues.


 * Images.
 * All images and the sound are valid. No issues.

Chris (talk) 13:59, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Overall.
 * Hold. Needs work on the references mainly, but can be done.

Reply to Review
Thank You. I have reviewed all of your suggestions, and fixed them. All dead links are fixed, some lines are also fixed. Please review these changes. I removed some information that could not be verified, and fixed a lot of things. Thanks Again. User:Sami50421 (talk)Sami50421 (talk) 20:21, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Guiding Light needs to be italicized. Expand lead to four paragraphs per WP:LEAD. Also on references, any publication must be italicized. Refer to WP:MOS on italics for mor information. Keep working at it. You will get it. Chris (talk) 15:00, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Corrections fixed. I expanded the header to four paragraphs, and I cited my sources. I also personally went through every source, and italicized it. Your suggestions have been very helpful to me, learning the strings. Please review the work again, thanks. User:Sami50421 (talk) Sami50421 (talk) 01:04, 15 May 2010 (UTC) I hope you don't mind me adding some comments, but there seems to still be a fair bit of work to be done to get this up to GA. I've not read the whole article in detail, these are some glaring problems that I noticed, that will prevent it reaching GA.
 * Some comments from Belovedfreak
 * Well done on expanding the lead section to four paragraphs. The thing about the lead though, is that it needs to completely summarise the whole article. At the moment it serves as more of an introduction, but should be able to act as a sort of stand alone article. WP:LEAD has more detail about this. It doesn't currently summarise sections 6, 7, 8 or 9, and seems to only skim over some of the others. Obviously, the same level of detail is not required, you don't need to recreate the whole article in the lead! Also, make sure that there is nothing mentioned in the lead that isn't mentioned/expanded on later on. You shouldn't need any citations in the lead, unless it's something that is likely to be challenged, because the same information will be cited later on.
 * The title of the first section is a little vague, really the lead should be the "overview". Perhaps the first section should be "history" or "background" or something like that. It also combines a lot of different info that could perhaps be organised better. I thought at first that there was no mention of critical respons to the show, but then I realised it was buried in the first section. In fact, the more I read it, the more that this section looks like what the lead should look like!
 * Citations should be placed directly after punctuation, with no space. Like this, not like this,
 * There is still some work to do on references. I've just looked at the first two. For the first one, "Days of our Lives home page" makes it seem like an official website. What's SoapOperaFan.com? Is it a reliable source? Who's Dustin? For the second one, the citation is missing the date the article was published. I had no idea what ET was. I see from the link that it's Entertainment Tonight. That should be written out in full and wikilinked. The other thing I noticed was that the title of the article is not "Frances Reid Passes", it's "'Days of Our Lives' Matriarch Frances Reid has died". The title needs to be the exact title used in the ET article. A quick glance over the others shows more problems: One citation is simply "www.soapoperadigest.com". That makes it extremely difficult or possibly even impossible to verify the information. When I type the address into my browser (as there's no helpful link!) it goes to the front page of that website, which is presumably changed and updated all the time. "Beth's Days Page" is used a couple of times - this is not a reliable source. Fan pages are not reliable enough, and when you look at that site, it even says "ll of the information on my page is from my memory or notes I've taken over the years while watching the show..."!

I hope these comments help, and I don't mean to discourage you at all. You've put in some good work to the article, but these are problems that will hold it back from being assessed as a good article. Regards, -- Beloved Freak  10:32, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks User:Belovedfreak I have reviewed your suggestions, and tried to fix them to the best of my advantage. In the past few days I have done a ton of work on it, with a lot of effort put into it. I would really like to see it pass as a good article. I believe it can pass, and hopefully it does. It's a good article, with lots of history. I have fixed the overview section, with a changed name to History. Some of Beth's Days' pages were not reliable so I fixed those. I fixed the title for Frances Reid Passes, and replaced it with it's proper title Days of our Lives Matriarch Frances Reid Passes. If there are any more suggestions please let me know. I'm willing to put the time in for it. Thanks. Sami50421 (talk) Sami50421 (talk) 00:53, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Passed. Good job. Chris (talk) 21:37, 16 May 2010 (UTC)