Talk:South Park season 1/GA1

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

Hey, hey, I'll be reviewing this article, as it's been up in backlog for a while now and I've been trying to get my hands on a season page to review. Okay, I think I'll just do a run down to see the article status, as it's a good article but needs some improvements:
 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * First off, the "Info unavailable" should be a footnote, not a ref. Second, the awards in IMDb is fine, but I've learned from my articles they sometimes don't always keep updated, so a backup ref to add to it'd be great. Third, could you find sources for the airdates?
 * Changed to just a note in the table; added IMDb refs for the nominatons; and it had refs for airdates, but added 2 more. Nergaal (talk) 18:32, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Changed to just a note in the table; added IMDb refs for the nominatons; and it had refs for airdates, but added 2 more. Nergaal (talk) 18:32, 17 July 2009 (UTC)


 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Reception section starts off making it seem it was praised, but then the reviews state they were mixed. Could you fix it to make it flow gentler? Something along the lines of "Despite the high ratings, reviews were mixed by critics."
 * How's now? Nergaal (talk) 18:39, 17 July 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:
 * Needs those things fixed and I believe it's ready. Good luck.  The Flash  {talk} 16:30, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Alright, article is fine now. I'll leave this for second opinion just to be thorough enough as I understand this is going for FA.  The Flash  {talk} 20:23, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * If this is GA, can we close it so it goes to FAC? Nergaal (talk) 23:16, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Needs those things fixed and I believe it's ready. Good luck.  The Flash  {talk} 16:30, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Alright, article is fine now. I'll leave this for second opinion just to be thorough enough as I understand this is going for FA.  The Flash  {talk} 20:23, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * If this is GA, can we close it so it goes to FAC? Nergaal (talk) 23:16, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I have labeled it for a second review. In two days, if no one picks it up, I'll pass it.  The Flash  {talk} 03:13, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Alright, it looks like no one's come to reassess it so I'll just give it a pass. Great work.  The Flash  {talk} 14:40, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reviewing!  The left orium  15:48, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem. It's great to see such comprehensive and factually accurate articles, which I think we can always expect from the South Park Project :D Good luck with the FAN.  The Flash  {talk} 22:55, 23 July 2009 (UTC)