Wikipedia:Peer review/The Post-Modern Prometheus/archive1

The Post-Modern Prometheus
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to see it be promoted to FA one of these days. I've poured quite a bit of energy into it, and any suggestions would be great.

Thanks, Gen. Quon   (Talk)   02:41, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Comments by Sarastro The main issue to work on with regard to FA would be prose; a few examples of redundancy, but generally pretty good. May be worth a last copy-edit and polish. I do not watch peer reviews, so please ping me with any problems or questions. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:13, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
 * "The episode generally received positive reviews, with critics calling it a classic, and by others as the most striking stand-alone episode of that season.": Something not quite right here: "by others as" bears no relation to the rest of the sentence.
 * "Later, Dr. Pollidori's wife Elizabeth becomes unconscious…": Presumably "is knocked unconscious"?
 * "Old Man Pollidori": "Old Man"? And maybe not quite clear that this is a different Pollidori to the one mentioned earlier.
 * "In a fanciful, if not imagined, scene…": Who says it is fanciful, and why might it be imagined?
 * "Carter had long wanted to write a Frankenstein-inspired episode, but had found it difficult to reconcile Mary Shelley's unbelievable tale with the stories being told on the show.": Redundancy: "[Previously], Carter had long wanted to write a Frankenstein-inspired episode, but had found it difficult to reconcile Mary Shelley's unbelievable tale with the stories being told on [style of] the show."
 * "To achieve his vision, he chose to write [wrote] a script that blurred the real world with the X-Files reality and that had a distinct fantasy element."
 * "Carter sought to evoke elements": Maybe "Carter sought to echo…" Rather than evoke. Or invoke.
 * "Following the episode's premiere, there was much fan speculation on the internet on [fans speculated] whether nor not Cher actually appeared in the episode"
 * "that Carter often frequented": "often frequented by Carter"
 * "Initial versions of the costume were deemed "too human looking" and so a newer design was settled upon.": "…was chosen"?
 * "Lindala was happy that the episode was filmed in black and white because it helped "the prosthetic [because] it is difficult to work in a foam piece that long and not recognize it as a painted, opaque, false translucency."": Repetition of because.
 * "where she picks him out of the crowd to dance with her ."
 * "Despite her physical absence from the episode, Cher's presence can be felt throughout the narrative.[15] In the episode…": Episode…episode. Maybe cut "In the episode".
 * "In the episode, Cher's "flamboyant and self-authored body" is used as a metaphor for "the possibility of self-transformation".[15][6]": Ref order?
 * "In the episode, Cher's "flamboyant and self-authored body" is used as a metaphor for "the possibility of self-transformation".[15][6] In addition, her voice, heard via songs like "Walking in Memphis", is associated with the idea of "circumvent[ing] patriarchy."[6]": All of this needs in-text attribution, or it looks a little like editorial voice.
 * "Negra notes that Cher's music is used in scenes during the Great Mutato's sexual encounters with woman, usually under the shroud of the pesticide tenting.": A little odd; to what does the "usually under the shroud of the pesticide tenting" refer? The music or the sexual encounter? Not really necessary either way.
 * "but rather the fanciful and elaborate happy ending that was concocted by the writer": What writer? And this seems a little odd, to be honest. Was it suggested in the episode, or is it just an off-the-wall suggestion?
 * In "Ratings and accolades", we have a rather long, uncomfortable list of people and awards that makes for hard reading.
 * "Eric Mink gave the episode a rating of four stars and praised it as an outstanding episode in a weak early fifth season of the show. He said that the two stars acted": Repetition of stars makes for a little misunderstanding. Maybe replace latter with "leads"?
 * Some of the reviews seem to come from low-key places. Is there nothing more heavyweight?
 * "Go ahead and watch it; you'll have a good time": Is this needed in the quote?
 * For me, the retrospect section is a little long, and begins to drag. Do we need so many reviews and viewpoints?
 * I have not spot-checked sources or considered images. Also, I am not an X-Files expert at all, although I occasionally watched it.

There are some value judgements in article and they are not supported by inline citations. It is unacceptable for featured articles. One should provide a citations on the high-quality reliable sources in every such a case or make text more neutral, in my opinion. --Heller2007 (talk) 05:48, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I believe I have addressed all the issues. As for the "value judgements", where exactly? I tried to add references to everything that seems disputable. If you're referring to the "fanciful ending", I added references.-- Gen. Quon   (Talk)   03:46, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I mean that every bit of information that contains any assessment should be provided with a citations on the high-quality reliable sources. For example, the article contains the following statements without any citations: "The Post-Modern Prometheus" received mostly positive reviews...(how was this estimate obtained?), Many reviews even called the entry a classic... (what is "many"?), and some other. There are two ways to fix this problem. One can provide a citations or rewrite text in more neutral form. For example, "The Post-Modern Prometheus" received a positive review by Mike Duffy... instead of "The Post-Modern Prometheus" received mostly positive reviews... or something like that. --Heller2007 (talk) 05:29, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. I'll try to neutralize it. I used a similar style for "Triangle (The X-Files)", but it passes just fine.-- Gen. Quon   (Talk)   02:12, 29 August 2012 (UTC)