Talk:Sanguinarium/GA1

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

Reviewer: Ruby2010 (talk · contribs) 00:42, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I've got this.  Ruby  2010/  2013  00:42, 2 January 2013 (UTC)


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


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): 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):
 * 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:

Comments

 * "...key dates on the witchcraft calendar." -- link witchcraft calendar (like you did in plot section)
 * You use "episode" a lot in the lead. I tried to trim some of it, but there are a few more you could tweak (to "Sanguinarium" or "it" for instance)
 * "... such large amounts of fat from the patient that they die." Is the patient female or male? "They" seems odd.
 * Who played Dr. Ilaqua?
 * "Scully deduces that both Ilaqua and Loyd..." -> Lloyd
 * ...Mulder uses the hospitals computer programs..." -/ hospital's computer program
 * Doctor Richard Cox -> Dr. Richard Cox
 * "spec scripts were a wide tradition..." -- I'm not sure "wide tradition" works here. You mean they were widely used?
 * "Sanguinarium" was such a case, being written by sisters Vivian Mayhew and Valerie Mayhew, a duo writing their first experience with an one-hour network program, -- writing their first experience? Could use a rewrite
 * "The sisters, which were asked staff writers Glen Morgan and James Wong for suggestions..." - You mean they asked Morgan and Wong for suggestions? The sentence is unclear. Also, split up the sentence (the quote can be split).
 * That same quote is confusing. Who said it? It also has no end quotation mark, making it unclear where it stops.
 * Put the end quotation mark. But the ref doesn't state which of the two said it, only it came from Morgan and Wong.
 * who suggested them to change the villain -> who suggested they change the villain
 * The spec script written by the Mayhew sisters was chosen to become a full episode, however, "Sanguinarium" stands as the only episode of The X-Files written by the two -- "however" doesn't work in this context.
 * Not sure if "incrusting" is the correct word to use. Use "placing" instead?
 * Explain who Howard Gordon is (like you do with Carter)
 * "...having the plastic surgery alley with five operating rooms..." -- Alley?
 * The nurse from the episode, Nurse Rebecca Waite, -- I'd remove the second "Nurse" here
 * "...but ended up as an unintended reference to Rebecca Nurse, an innocent woman prosecuted during the Salem witch trials." -- You mean the writers discovered the reference later? Or is this something a viewer of the series noticed? (I can't verify in the off-line source).
 * "did an excellent job -- I assume the ending quotation mark goes after "job"?
 * Why no wikilink for The A.V. Club?
 * The second paragraph of the reception could use a copy edit - you should go through it carefully and make sure everything makes sense. I see a lot of uses of "episode", run-on sentences, and clunky wording
 * Why is the section's third paragraph so short? You should move some reviews around so the paragraphs look more even
 * ""combines plastic surgery and black magic Into an unsatisfying mix that falls to lampoon our obsession with beauty."" - did he mean "fails"?
 * Screenshot and free image look good. No EL or dab link issues

The article mainly has prose issues; otherwise the content is solid. I'll place this review on hold for seven days while my comments get addressed. Please respond here when you have finished, and let me know if you have any questions. Thanks,  Ruby  2010/  2013  20:41, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Me and Gen. Quon did what we could, is it good enough now? igordebraga ≠ 15:11, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I crossed off most comments, with one more to go. I also copy edited the article -- make sure I didn't change the meaning of any sentences.  Ruby  2010/  2013  03:05, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The article now looks ready for GA status. Happy to pass this one. Good work you two!  Ruby  2010/  2013  06:03, 6 January 2013 (UTC)