Talk:It's About Time! (Phineas and Ferb)/GA1

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

Reviewer: C T J F 8 3  GoUSA 19:18, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Please add alt text to both images.
 * ✅  The Flash  I am Jack's   complete   lack of surprise 02:10, 28 February 2010 (UTC)


 * "they begin editing it to work properly" should editing be fixing? I've never seen the show, so I can't determine which is correct
 * ✅  The Flash  I am Jack's   complete   lack of surprise 02:10, 28 February 2010 (UTC)


 * It says that it was critically successful, but I see 1 positive and 1 negative review on the episode as a whole. It should be changed to specify that the episode received mixed (or mostly positive if you can find 1 or 2 more positive reviews), while also noting that the musical aspect of the episode received positive reviews.
 * ✅  The Flash  I am Jack's   complete   lack of surprise 02:10, 28 February 2010 (UTC)


 * The last stand alone sentence, is that referring to the production staff? I'm not a fan of stand alone sentences, so if you could merge that somewhere. I'd say add it to the first review paragraph and call the whole thing mostly positive reviews, although the production staff causes some what of a conflict of interest to reviewing the episode.
 * ✅  The Flash  I am Jack's   complete   lack of surprise 02:10, 28 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Ref 7, I don't see the PG rating on zap2it.com (not that I think it is important to list)
 * ✅  The Flash  I am Jack's   complete   lack of surprise 02:10, 28 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm concerned ref 15 requires Microsoft word to view (which for some reason is no longer installed on my computer) so some users won't be able to view the reference.
 * ✅ (archived it)  The Flash  I am Jack's   complete   lack of surprise 02:10, 28 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I also have concerns about the first paragraph in the "themes" section. It says multiple sources say they have a somewhat homosexual relationship. I agree that ref 13 says that, but ref 14 doesn't really say it. 14 says "The whole thing is treated like they are breaking up in some corny teenage love movie". Which doesn't really say they have some sort of homosexual relationship, but just comparing their break up with how a break up on a teen love movie would be.
 * I agree - the article states multiple times that "critics" (note plural) have said this, when we only have reference of one. And I can only think that that particular critic must have a bit of a weird mind to view them as having a homosexual relationship when their relationship is not remotely sexual.  Indeed, if it WAS sexual, then surely the bestiality would be a more noteworthy component of the relationship than homosexuality, since one of the characters is an animal (and probably uder the age of 10, given platypus life-expectancy)!  In actuality, it is plainly obvious that neither bestiality, homosexuality, or paedophilia were INTENDED overtones, just that one of them is a subtext that ONE critic chose to project onto it due to his own feelings. Since this is ONE critic, who must in view of the evidence be heavily biased, why is his view even being mentioned - let alone being portrayed as the view of multiple critics, and mentioned multiple times? 94.193.214.181 (talk) 12:25, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Still, it supports the two things it references, which are called homosexual undertones by ref 13.  The Flash  I am Jack's   complete   lack of surprise 02:10, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

C T J F 8 3 GoUSA 20:24, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

✅ Passing C T J F 8 3  GoUSA 05:08, 28 February 2010 (UTC)