Wikipedia:Peer review/The Daily Show/archive4

The Daily Show
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I'm really interested in bringing it up to FA-quality. I received some fantastic feedback in the article's last peer review which was invaluable in seeing it promoted to Good Article status, so I'd be delighted if anybody was able to offer any suggestions on how to improve it further.
 * Previous peer review

Thanks, Shoemoney2night (talk) 12:55, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Very briefly, here are some suggestions for improvement. If you want more comments, please ask here. I was hoping someone else would comment so you'd get more / a different perspective since the last PR. Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 01:34, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks pretty good, so these will be nipicky. Some segments recur periodically, such as "Back in Black" with Lewis Black, "This Week in God", "Trendspotting" with Demetri Martin, "Are You Prepared?!?", "Wilmore-Oliver Investigates", and "You Don't Know Dick" ... two things here - all of these are linked to the same article List of The Daily Show recurring segments which would probably be seen as overlinking at FAC. Also I would try to provide more context - identify correspondents who now do the segment).
 * While it generally reads well, try to avoid passive voice where possible, such as In the show's third act, an interview is conducted by the host with a celebrity guest. could be In the show's third act, the host conducts an interview with a celebrity guest. which is active and more concise
 * Problem sentence: A book titled The Daily Show: Five Questions (ISBN 0-8362-5325-6) was released by Comedy Central in 1998 and highlighted many of the best interview moments from Craig Kilborn's stint as host. needs a ref, I owuld put the ISBN into a footnote / ref, and as a one sentence paragraph I think it breaks the flow of the article and should be combined with another paragraph or expanded, if possible
 * Technically I think Steve Carell should be linked at the first mention of his name, not in the staff section (second mention).
 * Per WP:MOS, block quotes need to be about four lines long - "The show you are about to watch is a news parody. Its stories are not fact checked. Its reporters are not journalists. And its opinions are not fully thought through." is only one line on my screen and should be in the text.
 * All fixed! Thanks so much for the review, your comments have been really helpful to me in improving the article. It's much appreciated! -Shoemoney2night (talk) 06:39, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments from
 * You said you wanted to know what to work on before taking to FAC, so I looked at the sourcing and referencing with that in mind. I reviewed the article's sources as I would at FAC.
 * Current refs 8, 72 are lacking publisher, last access dates and/or other bibliographical information required.
 * Per the MOS, titles of links shouldn't be in all capitals.
 * http://www.idsnews.com/news/story.php?id=38119&adid=campus gave me a runtime error
 * What makes the following sources reliable?
 * http://www.worldnetdaily.com/
 * http://www.campusprogress.org/features/375/five-minutes-with-stephen-colbert
 * Hope this helps. Please note that I don't watchlist Peer Reviews I've done. If you have a question about something, you'll have to drop a note on my talk page to get my attention. (My watchlist is already WAY too long, adding peer reviews would make things much worse.) 23:27, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * All fixed by Shoemoney2night - except campusprogress link which appears to be reliable. Tom (talk) 14:41, 8 September 2008 (UTC)