Wikipedia:Peer review/Valley Girls (Gossip Girl)/archive1

Valley Girls (Gossip Girl)
This peer review discussion has been closed. Before re-nominating this for GA, I'd like some feedback on it. Its previous nom failed primarily because of prose concerns, but I'd appreciate any comments. Thanks, liquidluck ✽ talk  16:39, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: Apologies for the delay in reaching this. Here are some matters for consideration:-
 * Less Than Zero is a link to a disambiguation page
 * Several external links are not working. Refs [11] and [22] appear broken; [15] goes to an unrelated site.
 * Non-free images: you may have difficulty in arguing that each of these images "significantly increase[s] readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." If the infobox image remains, it needs some sort of explanatory caption, otherwise readers don't know what it is signifying.
 * Prose
 * Lead
 * "1980's" should be "1980s"
 * "2.31 million Americans" You don't need to specify that they were "Americans" (some of them may not have been)
 * "greenlit" is a slangy sort of term, a made-up verb from a figurative noun. It's not encyclopedic.
 * Plot: Rather too long as a plot summary for a single episode. Also, there seems to be an assumption that readers will have prior knowledge of the series – who the characters are, how they relate etc. I have never seen the series, and found myself very confused in the first paragraph: why is Serena in jail? Who are all these people introduced only by their names? What can I make of "Lily feuds with CeCe for telling Rufus about their lovechild."? Whose lovechild? And so on: I had to give up in the end because I just couldn't follow. I think the plot section needs to be rewritten so that it stands alone as a meaningful summary, even to those who are unfamiliar with the series, with a lot less detail about what are apparently side-plots and a concentration on the main storyline.
 * Background
 * "Background" is probably not the most appropriate title for the section, which covers virtually the whole history of the episode.
 * Awkward wording: "...would chronicle the life of Lily Rhodes during her life while attending..." etc
 * "Discussion about a Gossip Girl spin-off began in 2008, but the project seemed "unlikely"" To whom did it seem unlikely, and why the quotes? Shouldn't there be a citation here?
 * Sentences should not begin with "Still,..."
 * Dates should normally be given at the starts of sentences. Thus "On January 14, 2009, ..." etc
 * "Rumors that the spin-off would not be picked up as a series began well before the pilot even premiered due to the limited number of spots available on CW's fall line-up." The sentence needs flipping, thus: "Due to the limited number of spots available on CW's fall line-up, rumors that the spin-off would not be picked up as a series began well before the pilot even premiered." Also the penultimate word "even" is unnecessary.
 * Fashion and music
 * "1980's" again. Also "80's" (should be "'80s", though usually written out as "eighties").
 * Quote needs a citation: "like something that you'd want to be a part of, rather than make fun of."
 * I don't understand this sentence: "They hoped that young women inspired by the clothing styles featured on Gossip Girl would also be able to take ideas from spin-off." Ideas about what? And "from spin-off"?
 * "...in order to represent" - the use of "in order" is frowned on in Wikipedia as unnecessary verbosity. Suggest omit (and other instances).
 * "Says Savage" is not a good way of introducing a quotation
 * Contractions such as "hadn't" should be avoided unless they occur in quotations
 * "No Doubt makes a guest appearance..." Despite the link, "No Doubt" requires a brief introduction, e.g. "The band No Doubt makes a guest appearance..."
 * Reception
 * "80's" again
 * What is Film School Rejects? If it's a magazine it should be italicised.
 * General point: it might be an idea to have the list of featured music at the end of the article - less disruptive to the prose.

That's all. If you have any queries about my comments, or need clarification, please contact my talkpage as I am not able to watch individual peer review pages at the moment. Brianboulton (talk) 18:44, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for all your help! liquidluck ✽ talk  02:38, 23 April 2010 (UTC)