Talk:Stargate SG-1/GA1

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

I'm starting the GA review!

Images

 * File:NORADNorth-Portal.jpg - The links aren't working in the source field on the image description page. Also, we need a date and an author, if possible. Awadewit (talk) 03:08, 12 May 2009 (UTC)


 * File:Michael Ryan, official military photo.jpg - The link in the source field on the image description page should be linked to the HTML page, so that the image details can be verified (see WP:IUP). Awadewit (talk) 03:08, 12 May 2009 (UTC)


 * File:John-P-Jumper.jpg - The link in the source field on the image description page should be linked to the HTML page, so that the image details can be verified (see WP:IUP). Awadewit (talk) 03:08, 12 May 2009 (UTC)


 * File:La Tombe de Horemheb cropped.jpg - This image needs an English description. Awadewit (talk) 03:08, 12 May 2009 (UTC)


 * File:Milky way stargate with very detailed glyphs2.svg - I think that this might be a derivative work and therefore covered by copyright. Since the stargate itself is copyrighted, I think that drawings of it are derivative and therefore covered by copyright as well. If you want a picture of the stargate, I think it will have to be fair use. Awadewit (talk) 03:08, 12 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I'll address these issues later today. Thanks for your time. – sgeureka t•c 07:09, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * All points addressed except for the last one, which will be handled at Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Milky way stargate with very detailed glyphs2.svg. – sgeureka t•c 17:18, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It would be a shame to lose this image as it appears to be the only version of the Milky Way stargate design on Wikipedia that has all of the glyphs properly oriented (bottom of glyph to center of gate). 198.183.6.22 (talk) 18:58, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Article text

 * As explained in the series' backstory, the Goa'uld transported human slaves from Earth to other habitable planets across the galaxy thousands of years ago and now pose as gods of Ancient Earth mythologies, particularly Egyptian mythology. - Didn't they also pose as gods thousands of years ago? Awadewit (talk) 15:13, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * To my knowledge, the show never clearly explains when the Goa'uld started posing as gods. Probably the farthest flashback is in the feature film when the alien-to-be-Ra kidnaps the human boy to use him as a host, but it's not entirely clear if the alien already posed as Ra back then. – sgeureka t•c 15:10, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I guess I'm thinking of the alternative timeline when SG-1 goes back to ancient Egypt. Awadewit (talk) 02:20, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * The NID probably needs to be explained a bit better in the "Goa'uld arc" section. Awadewit (talk) 15:13, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Rewritten to "rogue agents of a shadowy intelligence agency on Earth, the NID, repeatedly attempt to take control ..." – sgeureka t•c 15:10, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Much better. Awadewit (talk) 02:26, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I think the "Cast" list would be clearer if it began with the characters' names. Awadewit (talk) 15:13, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The Actor as Character style is the de facto list style for cast information per WP:MOSTV and WP:MOSFILM. – sgeureka t•c 15:10, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Are they the Bible? :) I tend not to pay attention to non-binding guidelines like that, especially when they make articles more confusing, but do what you want here. Awadewit (talk) 02:26, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * A human alien who leaves his home planet Langara at the end of season 5 after witnessing Daniel Jackson's lethal sacrifice and the following gleeful reaction of his planet's leaders. - The first we hear of Jackson's death is in the description of Quinn. I find this a bit odd. Awadewit (talk) 15:13, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Completely rewritten for clarification. The sentence was technically correct since Jackson's sacrifice was lethal ("Lethal is something that is capable of causing death to a living being"), but the implication that Jackson actually died is incorrect because of a sci-fi twist, so the reader never actually heard of Jackson's death first here either. – sgeureka t•c 15:10, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The new version is much better - thanks. Awadewit (talk) 02:26, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * All episodes were filmed in 16:9 wide-screen, although Stargate SG-1 was broadcast in 4:3 aspect ratio in its first years. - Can you explain what effect this would have had? Awadewit (talk) 15:13, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't understand your question ("would have had" in what respect?). Even nowadays, it's still somewhat common in my country to air American TV shows in 4:3 although they've been filmed in 16:9 for ages. Showtime probably aired SG-1 in 4:3 in 1997-2002 because wide-screen TV sets were uncommon back then, so their behavior doesn't strike me as unusual. Why SG-1 was filmed in 16:9 from the beginning - I don't remember ever hearing or reading an explanation for this. – sgeureka t•c 15:10, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I don't even know what this distinction (16:9 vs. 4:3) means, so some sort of explanation as to what it indicates and what the differences might mean for the viewer would be helpful. Awadewit (talk) 02:28, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Found source to clarify transition from 4:3 to 16:9. See Article. Black Sabre (talk) 04:46, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * The design of the SGC base should match the real Cheyenne Mountain complex as much as possible. - The "should" in this sentence is confusing - according to whom? Awadewit (talk) 15:13, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I watched the DVD extra again, but it seems Hudolin's explanation is more ambiguous than the notes I once took (which served as the basis of the article). I've remove the sentence because I don't currently know where I could find a replacement source. – sgeureka t•c 15:10, 20 May 2009 (UTC)


 * For the design of the Ori and the Priors in season 9, the art department looked at Japanese and Samurai for costuming. - Japanese and Samurai what? These adjectives require a noun! Awadewit (talk) 15:13, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * User:Black Sabre clarified it as "the art department looked at Japanese and Samurai garments for costume design". – sgeureka t•c 06:21, 23 May 2009 (UTC)


 * The Prior and Doci face scarification was inspired by remote jungle tribes for the mystical aspects - I'm not quite sure what this sentence is saying. Awadewit (talk) 15:13, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Expanded to say "Art director James Robbins found the face painting, scarification and burns of remote jungle tribes mystical,, serving as inspiration for the face scarification of the Priors and the Doci." – sgeureka t•c 06:21, 23 May 2009 (UTC)


 * The "Music" section is a bit choppy. Awadewit (talk) 15:13, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I rearranged some bits in the first paragraph. The second and third paragraph seemed alright for the most part. – sgeureka t•c 00:05, 29 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Composer Joel Goldsmith adapted David Arnold's Stargate feature film score for SG-1's opening title theme, which remained the same during the run of Stargate SG-1 and its direct-to-DVD films. - This seems to be covered in the "Music" section already - does it also need to be covered in the "Opening sequence" section? Awadewit (talk) 15:13, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * While it could technically be considered redundant, repeating it is also helpful because readers may just want to read certain sections in long articles and skip the Music section. Other shows have different music composers and opening titles composers, so it's not clear that the relevant info might be found in the Music section. Lastly, as a reader, I'd simply expect to read about the origin of the opening titles theme in a section called "Opening title sequence". One sentence of redundance is a good trade-off. – sgeureka t•c 06:21, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree that readers might skip to only one section, but this article is already quite long and detailed. Some redundancy might have to be sacrificed. Awadewit (talk) 15:25, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I've thought this through again but come to my old conclusion that it should be left like it is. The "Music" section could go without a mention of the main title score much better than the "Opening title sequence" section, but then the End title score (which can't be moved to the OTS section) would be all alone in the "Music" section and read off instead. I can't lose the redundancy and make it work. – sgeureka t•c 00:22, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok. Awadewit (talk) 03:19, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


 * By far, the weakest section is the "Themes and allusions" section, which doesn't really explain the themes of the show. For example, one of the main themes that the show explores is religion. One could argue that it casts institutionalized religion as a controlling, manipulative, and violent system. The show is also feminist to a degree, with Samantha Carter's character making several overt comments about women in the military (there are also plot lines about women in combat and other gender issues). Do any of your sources address these basic issues? Awadewit (talk) 15:13, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * For the writing of this article including this section, I used up nearly all sources I already own (lots of magazines and DVDs), or could research for free. Expansion is possible with a few books like Stepping Through the Stargate and Reading Stargate, but I don't intend to spend money on my GAs. Additionally, the article already is 100kB (Mythology of Stargate is set up as the respective subarticle), and as a scientist, Themes aren't my strongest suit anyway (both in interest and non-rambling writing). – sgeureka t•c 06:21, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * There are entire books on this series that haven't been used in this article? This is a serious deficiency in my opinion. Have you tried getting the books through interlibrary loan from your library? Have you tried getting them from other Wikipedians interested in Stargate? Have you asked other Wikipedians interested in Stargate to work on this section? (For example, one of the books is available from my library. I could check it out and send it to you.) Awadewit (talk) 15:31, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * By using some books and writing two paragraphs on this topic, I felt and feel the broadness requirement of WP:GA? is met (even though using all books and writing more paragraphs would undoubtly benefit the article towards FA quality). I have no experience with interlibrary loans - English-language books are not that widely available in continental Europe libraries, and I expect tons of red tape with international interlibrary loans, where wiki research stops being fun for me. I have asked for help for other SG articles via WP:STARGATE or several SG forums/communities before on occasion, but have always had problems getting the kind of responses I was hoping for. Unless you really want to go through the pain and send me a few scanned pages from library books (forget postal mail), I'd just wait and see what usable books turn up on eBay and amazon marketplace eventually. – sgeureka t•c 00:22, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm going to look at the book available at my library and see. Since this section does not actually focus on the themes of the show, but rather its mythology, I think that is really missing some key elements. Awadewit (talk) 03:19, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


 * On August 21, 2006, a few days after the premiere of SG-1's milestone episode "200", the Sci Fi Channel confirmed that Stargate SG-1 was not being renewed for an eleventh season.[105] According to the Sci Fi Channel's Mark Stern, the decision was not ratings-based. - What was the decision based on then? Awadewit (talk) 15:13, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The answer is, SCI FI denied to comment for the most part besides this (probably to appease angry fans). Meanwhile, Variety (of course) mentioned the radically dropped ratings; Multichannel News mentioned dropped ratings, age, expensive production, bad exchange ratings, and lack of promotion; GateWorld mentioned dropped ratings, lack of promotion, removal of anchor show Battlestar Galactica, and new competition as possible reasons for the cancellation. I think I could pull up some interviews where the producers vaguely said it was a mix of reasons. But there was no official explanation. – sgeureka t•c 06:21, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, we should include some of this reporting. "Official reasons" are usually bogus anyway (politicians always say they are leaving to be "with their families", for example). The three sources you mention have some overlap - why not mention at least the drop in ratings? Awadewit (talk) 15:35, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Expanded. I used Variety and Multichannel News (Multichannel News were the first to report the cancellation). – sgeureka t•c 00:22, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * The "Broadcast and release" section feels overly detailed to me. This is the only time that I got bogged down in the article. Is it possible to cut this down a bit? Here are some examples: Awadewit (talk) 15:13, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It used to be even longer, and 4 paragraphs for a diverse 10-year US broadcast&ratings history was the best I could do as a years-long broadcast and ratings freak. – sgeureka t•c 00:05, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Although Stargate SG-1 received almost no media mention outside hard-core science fiction circles, the show was consistently the most-watched program (including theatrical movies) on Showtime - Perhaps this should be incorporated into the "reception" section?
 * The first part of the sentence already was in the Reception section, so I cut that part. – sgeureka t•c 00:05, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Do we need all of the details about syndication?
 * I don't know. It would take an American to judge the necessity of US syndication. International syndication is already very brief for its scope and relative weight. – sgeureka t•c 00:05, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Sci Fi switched the broadcast of SG-1 to widescreen and aired new episodes of Stargate SG-1 in the 9 p.m. Friday slot between The Dead Zone and Farscape.[35][93] Meanwhile, older SG-1 episodes aired on Sci Fi in a four-hour block every Monday at 7 p.m. and once a week in US syndication six months after their premiere on Sci Fi. - Can this be cut?
 * I took out the widescreen mention since it was already noted before in the article, but in what slot a show aired seems like the entire purpose of a Boradcast section. The mention of The Dead Zone and Farscape may be of interest since tweo Farscape actors joined SG-1, but I'd be fine if you want to remove that too. – sgeureka t•c 00:05, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The "Home video release" subsection, in particular, seems overly detailed.
 * I removed some numbers because they may indeed have been overwhelming/confusing. However, part of the confusion is because the British DVD releases were a mess (SG-1 was one of the first TV shows to be released on DVD, and the distributers were still trying to figure out what works best). Additionally, 4 of the 5 FAs (Lost_(TV_series), Carnivàle, Firefly_(TV_series), Arrested_Development_(TV_series)) with shorter runs and much clearer season-only releases have more detailed DVD descriptions. Only Doctor_Who is shorter (reason unknown). I also believe that 2 paragraphs are better than keeping this article around. – sgeureka t•c 00:05, 29 May 2009 (UTC)


 * The "Critical response" section seems a bit thin. The focus on the reviews of the first episode, for example, seems unrepresentative. Are there really so few reviews of the series afterwards? Also, are there SF reviews that should be considered? Awadewit (talk) 15:13, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The present reviews for the pilot episode were the only usable ones I could (still) find online. I have many sci-fi magazines with episode reviews for SG-1 beginning with season 5, but they don't really focus on the series as a whole and usually lack the scholarly out-of-universe detachment. I can't access my books at the moment, but I don't remember anything usuable there or I'd have punched up this section already. – sgeureka t•c 00:05, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

I'll try to look at all of the sources later today. Awadewit (talk) 15:13, 13 May 2009 (UTC)