Talk:The Burning Zone/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 15:44, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Happy to offer a review! Josh Milburn (talk) 15:44, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Critical response to The Burning Zone was mixed; commentators were divided over the storylines and tone. Critics had mixed reviews for The Burning Zone when compared to other science-fiction narratives." These feel a bit like two sentences saying the same thing.
  • Removed the second sentence. Aoba47 (talk) 18:31, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "task force" tasked" Repetitive
  • "Several of the episode's storylines combined spiritual components with hard science" Would "physical science" be preferable?
  • "Several of the episode's storylines combined spiritual components with hard science; some of the disease-based conflicts were solved through religion, such as a "willingness to pray" or embracing a “reason to live”. One of the taglines for the series was "the juxtaposition of the medical with the miraculous".[4]" Should this not be in the present tense?
  • You mention a "bureaucrat" in the premise section, but it's not clear who that is from the "characters" section.
  • Unfortunately, I could not find any further information on this. I can remove the "bureaucrat" part if necessary. Aoba47 (talk) 18:31, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • What was Newland's road?
  • I have added some additional information. Aoba47 (talk) 18:31, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Morgan and Tomita appeared in 11 episodes, while Susman was in two episodes. Black appeared in all 19 episodes, and Harris and Tatum were in 18 episodes and eight episodes, respectively. Henry Newland (Todd Susman) appears in two episodes.[10]" Tense shift. I assume this should all be in present tense?
  • True, thank you for the note. Aoba47 (talk) 18:31, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "who want to turn his capsule into a weapon" Capsule?
  • Unfortunately, I could not find much information on the episode. Here is the episode summary that I found: "The team find themselves protecting a former Nazi who carries a valuable capsule inside him from white supremacists who want the contents to power a deadly weapon.". Aoba47 (talk) 18:31, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is the dashes for the unknown viewing figures standard? I'd go for a questionmark or just leave it blank, but that may just be me.
  • I think that the dashes are pretty standard. I do not think that question marks would be appropriate for this context, and if I leave the field blank, then it comes out as a N/A. I can leave it as N/A if you prefer. Aoba47 (talk) 18:31, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The Burning Zone was one of six shows ordered by United Paramount Network (UPN), and it was the only new drama that the network had picked up" What, ever?
  • "In a University of California, Los Angeles report, The Burning Zone and The Sentinel had been criticized for their use of violence" I find the passive voice a little distracting, here. It also sounds a little like you're suggesting that this report was what led to the programme being cancelled.
Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:31, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "A rerun of an episode aired on May 27, 1997, and was viewed by 3.1 million people.[14]" My initial reaction was "so what?"
  • "The series has never been released on DVD or Blu-ray, or licensed to on an online-streaming service.[22] [4]" How about something like "In 2012, John Kenneth Muir requested for the show to be made available for DVD, alongside Sleepwalkers and Prey, but the series has never been released on DVD or Blu-ray, or licensed to an online-streaming service." (You might also consider an "as of" style note, as I suppose it's possible that it will one day be released in some format.)
  • Revised partially. I do not think the "as of" is necessary, as I do not feel that it will add anything really to the sentence. Also, there is very little if no chance at all that this will be released in any format. Aoba47 (talk) 18:31, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd consider moving the third paragraph of the critical response section to the production section and dropping the first sentence. It seems to be more about the context/genre than it is a critical response.
  • Moved to the "Production" section. Aoba47 (talk) 18:31, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • A small niggle, but I don't really like describing the people you're quoting as "writers". It doesn't really tell us anything. Are they journalists? Bloggers? Academics?

At first glance, the sources look decent, and the images seem appropriate. This is a nice little article; I'm sure it will be very useful to readers interested in the topic. Please double-check my edits. Josh Milburn (talk) 16:35, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • @J Milburn: Thank you for the review. I believe that I have addressed everything. Let me know if anything else could be improved. Have a great rest of your weekend! Aoba47 (talk) 18:31, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please don’t autofail this, I remember the show well and believe I can fix any remaining issues. Courcelles (talk) 18:57, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @J Milburn: Any further news regarding this review? I would be more than happy to complete it as a lot of progress has already been made with it. Aoba47 (talk) 04:23, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Aoba47 and Courcelles: Thanks for the notes. I am keen to finish this review, but I'm a bit swamped at the moment. Hopefully this weekend! Josh Milburn (talk) 18:00, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • No worries, take as much time as you need and good luck with your current work. I just wanted to check in with you. Aoba47 (talk) 19:14, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've reworked the lead a little, but that has involved removing any reference to The X Files. That belongs in the lead, though; could I perhaps ask one of you to add something back in? (Or revert me if you don't like my way of carving up the lead!)
  • Thank you for editing the lead; it looks much better. I have added the references. Please let me know what you think. Aoba47 (talk) 21:37, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Shiroma blames Marcase for the death of her fiancée" fiancée is a female; I am assuming you mean fiancé?
  • The fact it was nominated for an Emmy probably belongs in the lead.
  • I think, based on what is written in the section, you should probably describe the critical response as negative rather than mixed. (Lead and first sentence of the section.)

Hope that's helpful. Josh Milburn (talk) 19:55, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • @J Milburn: Thank you for the comments! I hope that you are having a wonderful weekend so far. Aoba47 (talk) 21:37, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • This slipped my mind. Mea culpa. I've had another read through, and I am confident that this is where it needs to be, so I'm going to go ahead and promote. Josh Milburn (talk) 15:03, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Burning_Zone/GA1&oldid=839915114"