Talk:Prince (New Girl)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Bilorv (talk · contribs) 12:02, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Sorry to see that this article's been so long in the GAN queue, but I'll review it now.


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


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Plot

 * she replies with a finger gun hand gesture — Bit unclear what this means in context. Does she display confusion? Bemusement? Nonchalance? ✅
 * After their own effort fails — The word "own" is not needed. ✅
 * advice about telling Nick she loves him back — I think this is better said as "advises her to tell Nick she loves him back". ✅

Production

 * Four days before filming was due to start, Prince decided to pull out as he was unhappy with changes to the script. — Yep, but it needs to be mentioned in this paragraph that after the script revision, Prince agreed again to be part of the episode later that day (as said in the Vulture source). ✅

Ratings

 * making it the most watched episode of New Girl and the only episode to reach over 20 million viewers — So far as I can see, the only other episode to break 10 million was the Pilot, which might be a better fact to mention then the bound "over 20 million", which no other episode comes anywhere near to. I wonder if it would also be worth mentioning something about the ratings of other episodes in the series, to establish a baseline e.g. "The episodes of New Girl that aired before and after "Prince" garnered around 3.5 million views" or "In contrast, the average viewership of an episode in the third season of New Girl, excluding "Prince", was X.X million". (Simple calculations are not original research per WP:CALC.)
 * I've added the average viewership of an episode to the section. I can find and add the ratings for the episodes before and after if needed. - JuneGloom07 Talk  19:18, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Critical response
This section needs a fair bit of work. There are two issues: the quotes are a bit too lengthy and contain irrelevant details; and the reviews don't seem to be organised in any particular way. For the first issue, take the first review: "Marc Hogan of Spin commented, 'A couple too many of the show's jokes involved characters inexplicably fainting or otherwise being a bit too FOX sitcom-y – couldn't Prince have been a fan of The Mindy Project instead? – but the Purple One's presence was pure gold.'" Something like "couldn't Prince have been a fan of The Mindy Project instead?" is really not suited for quoting in Wikipedia. This quote has two important details: Hogan disliked the "Fox sitcom-y" tone of the episode; and Hogan enjoyed Prince's performance. So the sentence would be better rewritten as: "Marc Hogan of Spin criticised the humour around 'characters inexplicably fainting', calling it 'a bit too FOX sitcom-y', but found Prince's appearance to be 'pure gold'." This is by no means the best way to write that sentence, but it's one step better.

For the second problem, for GA status it's likely enough to just segregate the reviews by whether they were (mostly) positive, mixed or negative. Perhaps try to link any commonalities in the reviews with connectives e.g. after the above sentence you could say "Lanford Beard from Entertainment Weekly also praised Prince's appearance, in particular describing the makeover scenes 'deliciously understated' and 'a nice counterpart to New Girl's frequently over-the-top comedy'."

These are just illustrative examples and by no means the best way of rewriting the content. This excellent essay is a good starting point for really high quality writing of Critical reception sections, but for GA we just need to avoid overreliance on verbose quotes, and make sure the sentences follow on reasonably from one another.
 * Hopefully this section flows much better now. - JuneGloom07 Talk  19:18, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Other

 * The lead's Around the same time, Prince enquired about ... doesn't make sense as the only time mentioned before that in the paragraph is "the broadcast of Super Bowl XLVIII". You could remove "Around the same time" or change it to "Around the time that the episode's post-Super Bowl timeslot was announced ..."
 * I rewrote the first part of this paragraph, as it didn't make much sense to me either! - JuneGloom07 Talk  15:41, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * with one calling it "a little tedious" — Direct quotes need an inline citation even in the lead. ✅

Overall
The quality of the prose is good and the article is thorough, neutral, stable and has a free image. It's reasonably close to meeting the criteria—just the nitpicks above and the Critical reception section to improve upon. — Bilorv (// W A K E U P //) 12:02, 3 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the review. I believe I've worked through all the points raised. - JuneGloom07  Talk  19:18, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Yep, they've all been addressed. Thanks for the Critical reception rewrite—it does flow a lot better now. I believe it now meets all six GA criteria so this is a pass for GA. Thank you for your work in improving the article! — Bilorv ( talk ) 22:24, 11 August 2019 (UTC)