Talk:FZZT/GA1

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

Reviewer: Shearonink (talk · contribs) 04:30, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

I am going to Review this article for possible GA status. Shearonink (talk) 04:30, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it well written?
 * A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
 * B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * I applaud the sourcing of all the quoted material from Bear McCreary but am uncomfortable with the sheer amount of quotes in the "Music" section. Per MOS:BLOCKQUOTE it would be better to place these quotes within a box-quote using Template:Quote or to paraphrase some of the material. Shearonink (talk) 05:37, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Much better - thanks. Shearonink (talk) 23:41, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it verifiable with no original research?
 * A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
 * B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons&mdash;science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
 * C. It contains no original research:
 * D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
 * Ran the copyvio tool, no issues found. Shearonink (talk) 04:46, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
 * B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * No edit-warring, yay! Shearonink (talk) 04:46, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * This Review is on hold pending the McCreary quotes in the Music section being adjusted. Shearonink (talk) 05:37, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review Shearonink! I have given the music section a c/e to paraphrase most of the quotes instead. - adamstom97 (talk) 05:55, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I am giving the article some proofreading readthroughs to see if I missed anything of a GA concern. Pending completing my passthroughs, I think I will be able to finish up this Review within the next day or two. Shearonink (talk) 23:41, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Nicely-written & factual, appreciate the non-puffery. I do wish some more images could be added but understand that it's Marvel and copyrights and trademarks and...well, yeah. Shearonink (talk) 02:33, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I think that a page move to something along the lines of "FZZT" (Agents of S.H.I.E.LD.) might be something to consider. I had forgotten that other episodes used this type of nomenclature until I went to place the article on the Good articles Television page.  Shearonink (talk) 02:44, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
 * We have used that for some other S.H.I.E.L.D. episodes, but it is generally only warranted if there is another article with the same title. And I will think about more images, but it is hard to find good ones to use that aren't copyrighted and stuff. - adamstom97 (talk) 04:21, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * This Review is on hold pending the McCreary quotes in the Music section being adjusted. Shearonink (talk) 05:37, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review Shearonink! I have given the music section a c/e to paraphrase most of the quotes instead. - adamstom97 (talk) 05:55, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I am giving the article some proofreading readthroughs to see if I missed anything of a GA concern. Pending completing my passthroughs, I think I will be able to finish up this Review within the next day or two. Shearonink (talk) 23:41, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Nicely-written & factual, appreciate the non-puffery. I do wish some more images could be added but understand that it's Marvel and copyrights and trademarks and...well, yeah. Shearonink (talk) 02:33, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I think that a page move to something along the lines of "FZZT" (Agents of S.H.I.E.LD.) might be something to consider. I had forgotten that other episodes used this type of nomenclature until I went to place the article on the Good articles Television page.  Shearonink (talk) 02:44, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
 * We have used that for some other S.H.I.E.L.D. episodes, but it is generally only warranted if there is another article with the same title. And I will think about more images, but it is hard to find good ones to use that aren't copyrighted and stuff. - adamstom97 (talk) 04:21, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
 * We have used that for some other S.H.I.E.L.D. episodes, but it is generally only warranted if there is another article with the same title. And I will think about more images, but it is hard to find good ones to use that aren't copyrighted and stuff. - adamstom97 (talk) 04:21, 13 February 2017 (UTC)