Talk:Growing the Big One/GA1

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

Reviewer: Carbrera (talk · contribs) 17:28, 8 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 18:36, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to check in on the progress for this. Aoba47 (talk) 20:21, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Initial comments

 * Infobox/Lead
 * The current promotional image is partly cropped on the right side where "Saturday, Octobe" is cut off; do you think this one may be more beneficial for the article? I see a very similar one is used on the Russian Wikipedia:
 * Good point; I have replaced the image. Aoba47 (talk) 01:39, 20 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I doubt there was a poster created for the film for promotional purposes (because it was just a made for TV movie), so instead of "Release poster" as the caption, I'd suggest changing it
 * Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 01:39, 20 May 2017 (UTC)


 * "programs schedule for broadcast" --> "programs scheduled for broadcast
 * Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 01:39, 20 May 2017 (UTC)


 * "Media commentators noted that the film marked a transition for Doherty away from her previous negative reputation." --> Before reading the rest of the article (to me), this sounds more like Doherty received negative feedback for her roles while in the article itself it seems like Doherty had just previously portrayed characters who were negative. I feel like this should be reworded, but I unfortunately cannot think of a worthy suggestion at the moment
 * Doherty actually earned a negative reputation for her behavior off the set; not sure why I worded it that way in the article. I have revised this to hopefully make more sense. Aoba47 (talk) 01:39, 20 May 2017 (UTC)


 * "The program" --> This doesn't sound correct to me for some reason; perhaps I'm confusing it with a TV program which I usually consider a TV series/show
 * Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 01:39, 20 May 2017 (UTC)


 * "which made it the second highest performing television movie on all ad-supported cable television networks." --> Is this just for the night or of all time? Please clarify
 * Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 01:39, 20 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Plot
 * "Valleyville" --> Is this town located in Washington? I'd also clarify this too
 * Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 01:39, 20 May 2017 (UTC)


 * "from the town know" --> "from the town known"
 * Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 01:39, 20 May 2017 (UTC)


 * "The pair's pumpkin start growing larger" --> "The pair's pumpkin starts growing larger"
 * Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 01:39, 20 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Production
 * "She contrasted this with the years in which she wrote and revised the script.[4]" --> Can you reword this as well? I'm confused what you mean by "with the years"
 * Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 01:39, 20 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Broadcast history and release
 * "It received a Nielsen rating of 2.6 million viewers, which made it the second highest performing television movie on all ad-supported cable television networks." --> Like I previously mentioned in the lead, this is for the night–correct?
 * Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 01:39, 20 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Critical reception
 * "(2000—07)" --> I believe there is some new part on Wiki's MoS that suggests this should be written as "(2000–2007)"
 * Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 01:39, 20 May 2017 (UTC)


 * "film's plot could be deduced "just by mad-libbing the basic plot formula"" --> Maybe "film's storyline could be deduced "just by mad-libbing the basic plot formula"" since then 'plot' will not be used twice in a row
 * Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 01:39, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * ON HOLD – Sorry this took so long. Regards, Carbrera (talk) 01:09, 20 May 2017 (UTC).
 * Thank you for your review; I believe that I have addressed everything. Let me know if anything else needs to be addressed. Aoba47 (talk) 01:39, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * – I just did a check through the references and Reference #13 seems to be more of a blog, which probably shouldn't be included on Wikipedia because it's self-published. I realize you use this source three times in the article, but I don't think you should use it at all. What do you think? Carbrera (talk) 01:51, 20 May 2017 (UTC).
 * It has been removed from the article. Let me know if you find any other questionable source used on here as I can be pretty bad with that sometimes. Aoba47 (talk) 01:53, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The rest looks great. #7 looked questionable but it comes from someone who was actually apart of the movie, which I find acceptable. Thanks for responding so quickly. Carbrera (talk) 02:04, 20 May 2017 (UTC).
 * Thank you for your help! Aoba47 (talk) 02:09, 20 May 2017 (UTC)