Talk:Sam Mitchell (EastEnders)/GA1

GA Review


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

Reviewer: MayhemMario (talk) 12:38, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: I found and fixed one disambiguations.diff Though other than that none! Well Done!

Linkrot: I found one dead link, reference 43 to Digital Spy

Checking against GA criteria

 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose) : b (MoS) :
 * In 3rd paragraph it talks about Clive and then suddenly says that her marriage is over and to the reader sounds like she is married to Clive. Maybe, Realising that her marriage with Ricky is over. The 4th paragraph on Storylines overacts a lot of what Sam did like leaps at the chance (maybe something more suitable?) Also Ricky will not reconsider getting back with Sam and opts to try and make amends with Bianca and Sam is forced to admit defeat. (NB not a GA requirement) MayhemMario (talk) 12:38, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
 * A lot of references problems. Need to sort them out. I found link number 8,24,29,33,41 and 43 do not work. 8,24,29,33 have been redirected, 41 goes onto main page of News of the World and 43 does not work. Also 42 and 44 are the same reference. A lot more needed for 'Reception' as has got expand so obviously that will be needed to be done. This does bring the article down as if you have got one of them it is obviously there for a reason (to expand it)!MayhemMario (talk) 12:38, 25 April 2011 (UTC)Found another problem, the title for reference 30 is not what it says. Please check it MayhemMario (talk) 16:34, 25 April 2011 (UTC) Found a few more, 15 the title is not correct, 19, its not The People its the BBC. MayhemMario (talk) 16:56, 25 April 2011 (UTC) I'm going to also say that you could add to the 'Characterization section' as you could easily get a few more references for it. I can think of one i.e. Sam Mitchell's profile on the BBC? You've got it on the External Links! Also deleting dead links is incorrect. There there for proof that the statement you impling was there just not now. MayhemMario (talk) 15:43, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Looking at Digital Spy and me just putting in 'Sam Mitchell' I can easily come up with references which this article dosent have. This article has a lot of development on her reaction on returning, returning interviews,what she did when she returned etc. But it has no expansion on the storylines like rumours of what might happen when she returns. I may be totally wrong but my P.O. is that when you put this up for GA status you didnt do enough research. Like I said before there are many refs which I have found i.e. To be perfectly honest I could go on for ever.... Though I'm not moaning as some articles i.e. this one do have a lot more infromation for them. MayhemMario (talk) 16:05, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Sam Mitchell return 'to cause a stir this is about Her and Minty but in 2009-2010 it says nothing about this just, Jack was confirmed as her baby's father, Sam departed once again
 * 'Enders Sam Mitchell to return pregnant? Agian it breifly touches on the subject but no major thing about it in the article.
 * BBC Three to air 'EastEnders' Sam Mitchell special Is that even in there?
 * Patsy: 'I'd love for Danniella to return' this also is another one not there....
 * Sam Mitchell is back and another one....
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Thorough and well focussed
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * There was one here diff but was resolved by blocking the user. If there is not one in 7 days, you will pass this. MayhemMario (talk) 12:38, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
 * This has not happened and thererfore you pass this. MayhemMario (talk) 15:02, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * This has not happened and thererfore you pass this. MayhemMario (talk) 15:02, 3 May 2011 (UTC)


 * 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):
 * Maybe this is picky, on the characterization of Sam you could put a picture of Westbrook like with Vanessa Gold. MayhemMario (talk) 12:38, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Just a few isues above to be addressed. On Hold for seven days. MayhemMario (talk) 12:38, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
 * No changes have been made so just a few isues above to be addressed. On Hold for another seven days. On the understanding the Nomiantor is not familiar with the process. MayhemMario (talk) 12:38, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * No changes have been made by any user associated with the article. On hold for one more day if not action has been taken, the article will fail. MayhemMario (talk) 17:38, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Sam Mitchell (EastEnders) was nominated as a Arts good article but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. MayhemMario (talk) 16:30, 12 May 2011 (UTC)