Talk:Northwest Passage (Fringe)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Starstriker7(Talk) 04:15, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

I will review this one. --Starstriker7(Talk) 04:15, 29 May 2011 (UTC)


 * If you'd like to find the specific locations, you can use the find aspect of your browser. This can usually be accessed using Control+F or Apple+F.

Lead

 * continuing to stay away --> as he continues to stay away?
 * Fixed

Plot

 * How does Peter go from being a suspect to being one who aids in the investigation? This should be clarified.
 * "but he gets away --> but he escapes.
 * "took place; a dairy farm" --> Is that the correct use of a semicolon?
 * "Meanwhile back in Boston" --> "Meanwhile, back"
 * All fixed

Lead

 * The lead doesn't mention anything about the Cultural references section. A mention should be made to encompass all sections of the article.
 * The lead already mentioned Twin Peaks, but I reworded it to say the episode has references to the series, not similarities

Layout

 * In the edit window, there is an extra white space between the Cultural references and Reception sections. This should be cut to one white space.
 * Didn't see the extra space on my edit window

Fiction

 * The plot should be rewritten completely in present tense.
 * "is kidnapped and murdered."
 * "Peter was involved"
 * "where the murders took place"
 * "They find the owner, who confesses to killing the women because they rejected him, and kidnapped and tortured Mathis's partner when he discovered the culprit"
 * "is approached by Newton"
 * "The man is revealed"
 * "After they ask why he didn't come"
 * I attempted to make a few tense changes, but I think the plot is all present tense already

Information and source issues (Criterion 2a [All information is cited; sections in proper position])

 * 1 is from a blog, but the blog appears to be written by a trusted author. I believe that this is excusable.
 * 3 is also from a blog. I am not sure if this is reliable. Try to replace this one.
 * http://watching-tv.ew.com/2010/05/07/fringe-season-2-episode-21/ 11] also feels like a blog. Ken Tucker seems reliable enough, but it still doesn't sit very well with me.
 * All three sources are very common and reliable, and I use them all the time with no trouble. To persuade you, I recently had an in-depth FAC and not one editor questioned those three sources' reliability. Also, all three websites are written by paid columnists, not just a random guy with a blog.

Contentious material and citation issues (Criterion 2b [Controversial/Contentious material cited; inline citations used])

 * The formatting for ref 6 (Jackson, Joshua, Martha Plimpton) is unequal. I'm fairly certain that it should be formatted either like "Joshua Jackson; Martha Plimpton" or "Jackson, Joshua; Plimpton, Martha."
 * Fixed to Jackson, Joshua; Plimpton, Martha

Original research issues (Criterion 2c [No original research])
None to report.

Broadness issues (Criterion 3a [All main concepts addressed])

 * For such a popular episode, I'm surprised it didn't garner any awards. Are you certain that none were won (or nominated)?
 * I have not seen any, but I'll do another google search for some After a google search, I failed to find any awards or nominations for the episode, unfortunately. I think it definitely deserved some though :/ Just another case of the series being criminally ignored by award-givers

Focus issues (Criterion 3b [Stays focused; need not the unnecessary detail])
It seems alright in this aspect.

Neutrality issues (Criterion 4 [No undue weight to certain viewpoints])
No problems here.

Stability issues (Criterion 5 [No edit warring, etc.])
All quiet on the Western front.

Image copyright issues (Criterion 6a [Images properly tagged, licensed, etc. if content is free-use])
There is one fair-use image, and it is properly tagged and licensed.

Image relevance issues (Criterion 6b [Images relevant and with good captions])
The Plimpton image seems a little on the tangential side, but I'll run with it anyways.

Overall comments
Nice work fixing up this article as such, Ruby. I'm going to put this on hold for now after the comments I've placed are resolved. --Starstriker7(Talk) 06:00, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for the review! It is much appreciated (especially with the awful backlog GA has now). Thanks again,  R uby2010   comment!  15:31, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Of course! I think you've addressed all my comments to my satisfaction. I'll hunt for the extra space in a sec, but this article looks ready to pass. Again, good work on this one! --Starstriker7(Talk) 19:37, 29 May 2011 (UTC)