Talk:Search Committee/GA1

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

Reviewer: Ruby2010 (talk · contribs) 19:15, 3 October 2011 (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 (references): 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, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Comments

 * So was the episode a two-parter? Why is it "the 151st and 152nd episodes of the series overall and the 25th and 26th episodes of the seventh season" if it aired as one single, hour-long episode?
 * It is counted as a two-parter, but it aired as a one-hour episode, like other Office episodes NoD&#39;ohnuts (talk) 23:41, 6 October 2011 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts


 * Wikilink Jim in lead
 * There's no need to have references for guest stars in infobox if they're listed in production section (or add them if they're not there).
 * The "Synopsis" is much too long; its meant to be a brief summary of the plot
 * There's a number of cultural references I feel you could add (see, , etc
 * Expand production section with this interview and this
 * Ref 5: Did Ricky Gervais write the blog? If so, add him as author to ref
 * Just looking through some reviews (some you included, but there are others), a lot of writers seemed happy that Erin and Phyllis weren't actually mother and daughter. You could add this in (like "Many critics expressed relief that Erin and Phyllis were not mother and daughter."[Ref][Ref][Ref]
 * That big paragraph in the production section doesn't look very good; try splitting it up by casting and writing
 * Use consistent ref formatting (compare 4 to 5 for example; find others)
 * It's The Huffington Post, TV by the Numbers, TVLine, RickyGervais.com (i.e. issues with italicization)
 * Wikilink all publishers, or none

Will place review on hold for seven days while above comments get addressed. Please respond here when you have finished.  R uby  comment!  20:04, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Just an FYI: there is one more day to respond here and address the above concerns, or the review will be failed. Thanks,  R uby   comment!  00:35, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Despite the warning above and eight days in this review, no response has been given to above comments. I am unfortunately failing this review. Feel free to nominate at a later time. I would happy to review the article again. Thanks,  R uby   comment!  17:20, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I apologize, i've been very busy lately, but I'm going to renominate it and i hope you review the article NoD&#39;ohnuts (talk) 00:15, 12 October 2011 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts