Talk:Idiotest/GA1

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

Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 09:53, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Comments
 * The lead could use a little expansion, it should cover all main aspects of the article, including the production, the reception and possibly the merchandising.
 * ✅ --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 13:39, 1 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Good news: image checks out for fair use licence.
 * Great! --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 13:39, 1 July 2015 (UTC)


 * When submitting an answer, is it multiple choice or are they writing stuff down?
 * ✅ --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 13:39, 1 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Any chance of a real example of these questions?
 * --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 13:39, 1 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Bonus Round, why not Smart Money Round in the heading if that's what it's called?
 * ✅ --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 13:39, 1 July 2015 (UTC)


 * " answer five Idiotests " okay, you need to say earlier on that that's how they refer to the questions, as "Idiotests".
 * --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 13:39, 1 July 2015 (UTC)


 * " with five second penalties" five-second
 * ✅ --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 13:39, 1 July 2015 (UTC)


 * "with five second penalties on wrong answers" for wrong answers, not "on" wrong answers.
 * ✅ --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 13:39, 1 July 2015 (UTC)


 * You haven't explained what GSN stands for anywhere.
 * ✅ in the lead. --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 13:39, 1 July 2015 (UTC)


 * "announced at GSN's 2014–15 upfront presentation on March 18, 2014. At the presentation, GSN announced" repetitive.
 * ✅ --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 13:39, 1 July 2015 (UTC)


 * "which began airing April 1, 2015.[7]" so 68 isn't the current total...? Is it weekly?
 * There are two new episodes a week; I've added a note in the infobox. --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 13:39, 1 July 2015 (UTC)


 * "has generally received" is generally needed here?
 * --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 13:39, 1 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Media Life Magazine is a work and should be italicised.
 * ✅ --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 13:39, 1 July 2015 (UTC)


 * "Users who answer a certain amount of questions correctly" clumsy writing.
 * ✅ --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 13:39, 1 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Publisher in ref 10 appears to be in parentheses while the publisher in ref 12 does not. Consistency please.
 * ✅ --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 13:39, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

That's it, nothing major, but some issues with some of the prose and some more content could be added to enhance the reader's understanding of the show's main concepts. I'll put it on hold for a week. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:15, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, I think it's ✅, let me know if there is anything else. Thanks, --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 13:39, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Okay, a lightweight article but one that nevertheless meets my interpretation of the criteria and isn't obviously defective in any critical section. Promoted. Good work. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:56, 2 July 2015 (UTC)