Talk:Steve Burdick/GA1

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

I'll be reviewing this article shortly. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:35, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)

Specific concerns
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * One particular sentence needs straightening out, and some attention to some other little glitches
 * 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):
 * A bit of context on the series itself would be good.
 * 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:
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * http://www.stevecap.com/alternatechannels_net/articles/kudos.htm is a marginal source. I tried to find an archive for the award on GLAAD's site, but no go, so I won't hold the GA status back but if this goes to FAC, it would need to be replaced.
 * There's never going to be enough information to take this to FA.


 * Might mention the award won in the lede.
 * Added.


 * Any background on the series itself? I'm not a big TV watcher and I've never heard of the series so a bit of context about it might be good. Did the series follow a set group of people or was it a new cast of characters every episode?
 * Added "an anthology drama that each week followed a new set of characters dealing with a medical issue" to the lede, do you think that's sufficient?


 * The sentence in Reception that starts "Calling the episode "as much an indictment... "is VERY convoluted and I got lost. Suggest splitting it up into several sentences.
 * Done.


 * One concern is that the reception section is a bit heavy on quotations. Cutting back a bit on the direct quotations would probably improve the feel of the prose.
 * I pulled two large quote-chunks.


 * The synopsis section has a large number of the sentences starting with "Burdick"... suggest varying that a bit.
 * There is one that starts "Steve Burdick", one that starts "Burdick" and one that starts "Burdick's" out of seven sentences. Seems like a decent variety. Otto4711 (talk) 21:00, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:52, 20 February 2009 (UTC)