Talk:Remedial Chaos Theory/GA1

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

Reviewer: The Most Comfortable Chair (talk · contribs) 16:29, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello. I will be reviewing this. Thank you. — The Most Comfortable Chair 16:29, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Lead

 * "The episode overall received critical acclaim" — "overall" feels slightly awkward in the middle like that. Perhaps just remove it?
 * "It has been described as one of the best episodes of 2011 or of the 2010s" — Dropping the second "of", would "and" or "as well as" instead of "or" be better suited? → "It has been described as one of the best episodes of 2011 and the 2010s" or "It has been described as one of the best episodes of 2011, as well as the 2010s".
 * Yep, chose the former. — Bilorv ( talk ) 10:49, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Plot

 * It is common for films and songs to be written as Interstellar (2014). I do not believe that is required for Raiders of the Lost Ark as the content is about its boulder diorama, however I believe "Roxanne" should be written with (1978) at its first mention.
 * Yeah I think this is acceptable either way, but I've got no objections so I've added the year to "Roxanne". — Bilorv ( talk ) 10:49, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * "When Shirley leaves, the group let her pies burn, so she insults them and exits." — It was a bit confusing to me until I read ahead. As I read, it seems like Shirley had left (the party) and then the pies get burnt, but then it is mentioned that she insults them before exiting. Maybe just add "leaves to get pizza" or something similar?
 * Yes, this is one of the reasons it's good to get the opinion of another person—I would have never noticed this, but it is confusing so I've replaced "leaves" with "gets pizza". — Bilorv ( talk ) 10:49, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Production

 * "The episode marks the first directing credit of the show for Jeff Melman." — I couldn't verify this from other sources, so please add a citation.
 * I can't find a source for it, so I've just said: "The episode was directed by Jeff Melman." (Implicit primary source is the work itself.) It actually appears to be Melman's only directing work on Community, but I'm basing that off the unreliable IMDb. — Bilorv ( talk ) 10:49, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * "Chang" — Write the actor's name in brackets perhaps, since its the first mention of the charaacter.
 * Unlink — "Roxanne" as it is linked in the section above.

Themes

 * "Pierce being jealous at Abed for Troy moving to live with him." — It is worth mentioning why he gets jealous (Troy moves out).
 * Yeah that was supposed to be implied by the wording but hopefully this is more explicit: Pierce being jealous that Troy moves out of his mansion to live with Abed. — Bilorv ( talk ) 10:49, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * "One critic opined that" — Perhaps it would be better to mention who the critic was instead, like done in the next paragraph: "David Mello of Screen Rant reported".

Critical reviews

 * "Whilst critical reception to the first three episodes of season three were generally lukewarm" — Minor point but "three" gets repeated twice. Perhaps "Whilst critical reception to the first three episodes of the season were generally lukewarm" would flow better.
 * Link — "Emily VanDerWerff", "Ken Tucker", "Alan Sepinwall", and "James Poniewozik".
 * Unlink — "IGN" when linked for the second time.

General
That will be all for now. It is a well-written article and should pass. Thank you for your work! — The Most Comfortable Chair 06:12, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I found these two pages where a lot of sentences match the article's phrasing. However, I suspect it is the pages that use the article's content and not the other way around.
 * Yeah they definitely are - I do not know what those sites are but I have to suspect that they are not safe to visit. — Bilorv ( talk ) 10:49, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I've addressed all these comments, I think, and replied to some of them. Thanks for taking the time to review this carefully! — Bilorv ( talk ) 10:49, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Final

 * 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:
 * The fine quality of this article fittingly matches that of the acclaimed episode. You have done a great job in writing it. Thank you for your efforts! — The Most Comfortable Chair 11:12, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * 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:
 * The fine quality of this article fittingly matches that of the acclaimed episode. You have done a great job in writing it. Thank you for your efforts! — The Most Comfortable Chair 11:12, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The fine quality of this article fittingly matches that of the acclaimed episode. You have done a great job in writing it. Thank you for your efforts! — <b style="color:#000000">The Most Comfortable</b> <b style="color:#4B0082">Chair</b> 11:12, 3 October 2020 (UTC)