Talk:Job Fair (The Office)/GA1

GA Review
This review is transcluded from Talk:Job Fair (The Office)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.


 * "Plot synopsis" &rarr; "Plot"
 * Expand the second paragraph in the lead.
 * Only periodicals need to be italicized in the references, not all publishers.
 * References need to be consistent; some have comma or period before "Retrieved". I suggest using cite web for all.

Gary King ( talk ) 21:31, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Made the changes, tell me what you think. -- Mr.crabby    (Talk)   22:17, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

The prose needs some work. Some examples below (these are only examples; please take a look at the entire article's contents):


 * "Office—the" &rarr; "Office, and the"
 * "few employees goes to an area high school's job fair" &rarr; "few employees go to a high school's job fair"
 * "Pam does venture to a booth " &rarr; "Pam ventures to a booth "

Gary King ( talk ) 22:28, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Fixed the prose issues you mentioned along with some others that I've found. -- Mr.crabby    (Talk)   22:40, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Still need an "and" here: "The Office, the show's " &rarr; "The Office, and the show's " – otherwise, it might as well be split up into two sentence
 * "the one's who" &rarr; "the ones who"
 * "At first the client " &rarr; "At first, the client "
 * "to be not interested in talking about businees," &rarr; "to not be interested in talking about businees,"
 * "suppliers, he" &rarr; "suppliers; he" – the semicolon needs to be there otherwise the break between the two phrases seems awkward
 * "After much" &rarr; "However, after much" – "however" because the preceding sentence says that he is not interested; his change of mind seems so sudden, that a conjunction word should be placed here

There are probably a few more similar examples like these throughout the article. I think a second pass-through should be made. Cheers. Gary King ( talk ) 23:15, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Mastrchf and I both went through the article. Here's what we found: -- Mr.crabby     (Talk)   14:47, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations! This article now meets the Good Article criteria, and has therefore been passed. Gary King ( talk ) 17:39, 29 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your time! -- Mr.crabby    (Talk)   18:13, 29 June 2008 (UTC)