Talk:List of Smallville characters/GA1

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


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * In section "Lana Lang", Chloe is mentioned for the first time without context. Even though hers is the next section, a last name, or some explanation is in order. The same goes for Lionel in section "Chloe Sullivan" and "Martha Kent"
 * In section "Pete Ross", last paragraph, sentence: "There was dissension over Jones’s character leaving the show." Among what group was there dissension? Producers? Fans? Cast? Also, in that same paragraph, since Millar and Gough have been addressed by surnames only throughout the section (and most of the article), there's seemingly no need to specify first names here.
 * I removed the first names.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  15:06, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Minor point in section "Jonathan Kent": How about "to run for a seat in the Kansas Senate". I don't know specifically, but I suspect that the title for one in that office is not specifically Kansas Senator
 * Same section: Is "Suspect" an episode of the show? If so it should have better context, like "… the nth-season episode "Suspect"…". Same goes for "Forsaken" mentioned later in this section, and others.
 * Probably still needs to be done for the "Recurring Guest" section, but that's a level of time that I won't be able to commit until I return home after Christmas.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  15:06, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Section "Martha Kent": What is the Talon?
 * In section "Lionel Luthor": The way the sentence reads it sounds like Clark, like the caves, also has Kryptonian symbols painted on him.
 * In the same section, was Lionel arrested for the murder of hi own parents? If so, perhaps that could be made more clear.
 * The sentence beginning "Where Clark brings "angst" and "depth" to …" should probably have some sort of in-text attribution, since it is quite clearly an opinion. I know it is cited, but it's better to have "[Name of person] stated that…"
 * Section "Oliver Queen": unclear antecedent for the phrase "and repel bullets fired at him". Who is this referring to, Lex or Oliver?
 * What are the "secret 33.1 facilities"? Only one mention without further explanation.
 * Part of the same sentence, it reads, "...where Lex experiments on meteor-infected individuals against their will." - Was there more that you thought needed explaining?   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  21:34, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * In section "Tess Mercer": to which season is the following phrase referring: "Tess Mercer's primary goal for this season will be finding Lex"? Also, it would be better if the sentence were reworded to offer attribution for the future actions.
 * Section "Sheriff Ethan": who are Mark Verheiden and Greg Beeman in relation to this show? Why is their opinion notable?
 * Section "Dr. Helen Bryce": For whom did she draw the blood sample?
 * It already says, "after taking a sample of blood from Clark during a period when he was infected by kryptonite."   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  21:38, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I see from whom she drew the blood. I was wondering about this sentence: "Helen promises Jonathan that she will keep Clark’s secret, but at the same time she does not destroy the vial of blood she took for him." Is that supposed to be "from him", "for Jonathan" "for Lex" or for someone else? If for is not a typo, the antecedent for the pronoun is unclear. — Bellhalla (talk) 12:11, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * That was a typo. It should have been "from". I fixed that and clarified "from Clark".   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  15:06, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Section "Dr. Virgil Swann": Not sure what this sentence is trying to say: "Clark visits Swann at his conservatory, where Swann gives him the message he received along with a second message that came Clark that his name was "Kal-El"…"
 * Same section: This might be better as two sentences (or one better-puctuated one): "Gough and Millar always had intentions of bringing Christopher Reeve onto the show, and when they found out that he enjoyed watching the show himself Gough and Millar decided that they were going to bring him on for season two."
 * Section "Adam Knight": What is this trying to say: "but the crew contest that it was never their intention to reveal Adam Knight to be a young version of Bruce Wayne"?
 * Section "Milton Fine": "Clark prevents Zod from being released, and assumingly destroys Fine" If Clark or the audience is led to believe that Milton Fine was dead at the time, I think presumably is a better word. Also, same section: "…fragment infects itself into a lab technician…" strange use of infects here.
 * The doubled headers of the the two subsections of "Other characters" look strange and make it difficult to follow, especially for the Guest Characters. On my computer/monitor setup, to go from the bottom of the first column to the top of the second, I have to page-up seven times. One way to approach this might be to have each season as its own section with both recurring and guest characters listed.
 * What are you using? I've looked at the page on IE and Firefox, and I'm not getting this issue. No one else has brought it up either. If your resolution is set that low then I don't think the page should be modeled to fit one type of res. setting. By setting the section by seasons, you lose track of who is a recurring guest. Plus, some seasons have a load of single episode guests, and if you remove the double column it will make the page extremely long. The double column is there to limit some the literal length of the page.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  15:06, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * What is the source for all of the actors/characters in the "Other characters" section?
 * 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.:
 * Looks like some IP reversions/undos, but nothing that suggests an edit war, by any means
 * 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):
 * The images in section "Kara" and "Dr. Virgil Swann" are directly underneath the section heading in contravention of WP:IMAGE.
 * I fixed this. The Swann image should have been right aligned.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  15:06, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The "Dr. Virgil Swann" image is directly below the header still
 * The images of Aaron Ashmore and Laura Vandervoort create text "sandwiching" which is also cautioned against in WP:IMAGE
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Most of these should be easily remedied, so I am placing the article on hold for seven days. I don't anticipate anything that would prevent this from passing once these items are addressed. (During my review of the article, I also made several minor spelling and grammar changes and some other copy-edits.) — Bellhalla (talk) 19:21, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I was actually in the process of c/eing and trimming (there is a bit too much detail for some characters), when you started to do the same thing. Hopefully I saved what you added. I will continue the c/e and trimming though. Some of your concerns in the primary character sections will be addressed by the fact that I'm trimming a lot of that information from the page (they have their own pages, so we really don't need to bog this already long page down with too much plot detail). To answer you question about the "Other characters", the source is their episode. None of them were "uncredited" appearances, they were all credited in the show (which can be, grudgingly, verified by IMDb, OR, any of the companion books...as the only people listed there are the ones the official companions deemed as "guest stars" and not simply some stand-in that had a name). The only reason I didn't put a source there was because it would really have been a lot of repetitious citations that would be equivalent to putting a source next to Heath Ledger's name on The Dark Knight page.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  19:52, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Most of these should be easily remedied, so I am placing the article on hold for seven days. I don't anticipate anything that would prevent this from passing once these items are addressed. (During my review of the article, I also made several minor spelling and grammar changes and some other copy-edits.) — Bellhalla (talk) 19:21, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I was actually in the process of c/eing and trimming (there is a bit too much detail for some characters), when you started to do the same thing. Hopefully I saved what you added. I will continue the c/e and trimming though. Some of your concerns in the primary character sections will be addressed by the fact that I'm trimming a lot of that information from the page (they have their own pages, so we really don't need to bog this already long page down with too much plot detail). To answer you question about the "Other characters", the source is their episode. None of them were "uncredited" appearances, they were all credited in the show (which can be, grudgingly, verified by IMDb, OR, any of the companion books...as the only people listed there are the ones the official companions deemed as "guest stars" and not simply some stand-in that had a name). The only reason I didn't put a source there was because it would really have been a lot of repetitious citations that would be equivalent to putting a source next to Heath Ledger's name on The Dark Knight page.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  19:52, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I took care of all your issues, except for the in-text attribution in the Oliver Queen section. I plan to take care of that, the source book is just at work so I won't be able to get it until I go to work tomorrow. Though I took care of what you asked, I'm still in the process of fine-tuning all the other sections (i.e. trimming verbosity, putting in season/episode identifiers for events, and expanding on a couple of characters that have not been updated for the current season). So, I'll probably need a couple more days to take care of that.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  00:27, 16 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Here is my most recent work (It includes the addition of the name attribution in the Oliver Queen section). I have finished the cast regulars section. I'm going out of town this week, so I won't really be able to do anything with any article till I get back. I still plan on trimming excessive details from the guest character section, but if you want to look it all over and see if there are any general copyediting issues (grammar, etc) and let me know then I will address them when I return. If not...well, then you know what to do. Happy Holidays.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  14:04, 20 December 2008 (UTC)


 * The main remaining issue I'm concerned about is referencing for the "Other characters" section. Having no references for nearly 40% of the article doesn't seem to meet that requirement. Are there GA character articles for other TV shows that can offer guidance on how to handle this? I myself will have less-than-usual time to access WP over the next 10 days. Respond when you can; I will keep the article on hold until then. — Bellhalla (talk) 12:11, 22 December 2008 (UTC)


 * The only list that comes to mind, which is also where I got the idea of the double column listing, is from Arrested Development (TV series), where they list out the "notable" guests. Now, this page is a featured article, and the list was present when the article was reviewed. Personally, I think the article needs cleaning up, and might not be FA worthy. The difference between this list and that list is that the Arrested list provides the episode title for the appearance of the character.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  15:06, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I have sourced all of the names. The only thing left to do is clean up the "Recurring Guest" section some more. But, I need a break so I'll get to that a bit later. Other than that (which is more of my own personal issue), I believe that all of your issues have been addressed. If not, then let me know.  BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  19:44, 31 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Apologies for not getting back on this sooner, but I have passed the article. I think the article is in really great shape and would highly recommend that you take it to FAC. If you do plan on doing that, you should probably address the date formats and linking in the references, but I see no other issues that would prevent this from reaching FA status. Good luck, and cheers! — Bellhalla (talk) 15:48, 8 January 2009 (UTC)