Talk:Tooms/GA1

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

Reviewer: ♦ Dr. Blofeld  13:20, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Beginning read through.♦ Dr. Blofeld  13:20, 14 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Plot


 * "Further research on the skeleton reveals bite marks from Tooms." I thought you said no substantial evidence could prove it from Tooms? Perhaps changed to the first part to "initially no substantial evidence could prove it" so it doesn't seem out of place further down.
 * "When the old couple watching Tooms goes out " - depart would be better.
 * "When the old couple watching Tooms goes out and Tooms is visited by Dr. Monte, he kills him and presumably consumes the final liver he needs before his thirty-year hibernation." Presumably? How do you know?♦
 * No mention of the "Mulder I think its bile"? Wasn't his nest preserved with bile or something. Perhaps mention this. Ah don't worry you mention this below.


 * Reception

Again the "Den of Geek" sources are dubious. If this is a RS and notable website why isn't there an article?♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:01, 14 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for taking the time to review this. I'll make the changes now, but as for the Den of Geek stuff, I did check WP:RSN before I added it, and found this discussion. The response there was that it was from a reputable magazine publisher, Dennis Publishing, and should be okay as a source. If that's not the case I can remove the content using it, as none of it is overly important. GRAPPLE   X  16:31, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Diff of changes made.  GRAPPLE   X  16:35, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:

Good job. You have picked up on the formula which works for these television episodes and provides an effective, focused article on it, even if relatively short. Even though some episodes can be very complex, you've developed a good ability to summarize it well without making it sound like the work of a fan going into unnecessary detail. Obviously this article would need a great amount of work if this is to ever become an FA, Tooms likely has more sources than most of the X files episodes I'd imagine but accessing them may not be possible. ♦ Dr. Blofeld  17:15, 14 August 2011 (UTC)