Talk:Lethal Inspection/GA1

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

Reviewer: Queenieacoustic (talk) 19:18, 24 April 2011 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Hi C T J F 8 3 ! This is my first ever GA review, so if there's something I'm doing wrong, just tell me.

I've read the article and while it is well-written for the most par, I have still noticed some things that need to be done. They are as follows:

Plot

 * ✅ Bender soon discovers that he suffers from a terminal manufacturing defect: built without a back up unit, making him mortal. Write "he is built without a back up unit" etc.
 * ✅ Bender's attempts to discover the inspector's identity from Mom's Friendly Robot Company. This sentence doesn't make much sense. Please reword it.

Production

 * ✅ The episode is a rare episode in which Hermes is the lead. This sentence is poorly written. Please rewrite it.
 * ✅ Cultural references in the episode include the Rubik's Cube, the television show Hollywood Squares, and actor and comedian Paul Lynde, who was the regular "center square" on the show Not sure if this fits in Production. Isn't there usually a separate section for cultural references?
 * ✅ The image caption needs punctuation and (pictured).

Reception

 * ✅ You should probably explain what the "ratings" and "shares" are for those who don't know Nielsen-speak.
 * ✅ The second paragraph is very long. It should probably be made into two paragraphs.

✅ Also, "Futurama" needs to be italicized.

As you can see, the article is not far from GA status, just fix these issues and I'll be able to pass it. I'll put it on hold for seven days, though I'm pretty sure you'll be done with it before then. Queenieacoustic (talk) 19:18, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the review! I have fixed all your concerns. C T J F 8 3  01:15, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Not quite, there are some things in the Production section that need to be fixed. You're almost done though! :) Queenieacoustic (talk) 10:51, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
 * How in the world did I miss the whole "production" section?! Normally the cultural references (CRs) would be in a separate section...but since it is one sentence, I didn't want to put it in it's own section...and actually, I'm going to expand on what I have for CRs and give more specific details after I wake up. C T J F 8 3  12:04, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Just an FYI, I've been a bit busy at work, and don't have enough time now to sit down and expand the CR section, but will get to it in about 24 hours, which is my day off. C T J F 8 3  21:18, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay. Queenieacoustic (talk) 21:41, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Forgot I had work training today...but all done, I'm happy with the cultural references section. C T J F 8 3  02:59, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
 * It seems you spelled "bureaucrat" wrong, but since it's such a minor mistake, I have been bold and fixed it. Queenieacoustic (talk) 10:09, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Congratulations C T J F 8 3  ! You can now add this one to your GA résumé. Queenieacoustic (talk) 10:10, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review! C T J F 8 3  19:22, 28 April 2011 (UTC)