Talk:Adventure Time season 10/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Figfires (talk · contribs) 14:56, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria

Further information: WP:WIAGA

Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.^[1]

Verifiable with no original research:

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;

(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);^[2]

(c) it contains no original research; and

(d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.

Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;^[3] and

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

^[4]

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

^[5]

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.^[6]

Review

Well-written:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (prose)	I saw no issues with the prose whatsoever.	Pass
(b) (MoS)	Follows all guidelines of the manual of style including dates/numbers, lead section, WTW, etc..	Pass

Verifiable with no original research:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (references)	Has a list of references appropriately displayed at the bottom of the page	Pass
(b) (citations to reliable sources)	Contains many in-line citations to various sources. All sources appear to be reliable.	Pass
(c) (original research)	I did not find any OR	Pass
(d) (copyvio and plagiarism)	I did not discover any copyright violations or plagarism	Pass

Broad in its coverage:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (major aspects)	All major aspects of the season are included. These include the cast, development, episodes, media release, etc.	Pass
(b) (focused)	The article does a good job of staying focused on the main aspects of the season without going into too great of detail	Pass

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Notes	Result
There were no issues with neutrality	Pass

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Notes	Result
No edit wars from what I have seen... simply instances of vandalism	Pass

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)	All images have their copyright statuses/fair usage rationales displayed on their pages.	Pass
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)	All images have captions that appropriately and fully describe them	Pass

Result

Result	Notes
Pass	Overall, the article was really good. There were virtually no errors at all. The only issues I had were areas with many citations. Since that has now been fixed, I am passing this as a GA.

Discussion

In the second paragraph in the cast section, there is an incident where 6 citations occur together. Could that possibly be changed to make the paragraph look better? It is simply too many citations for one sentence.
Same thing in the first section of the Broadcast and reception area. It would look better in my opinion to have "Sixth,(citation) seventh,(citation), etc.." than what is currently there. Figfires^{Send me a message!} 23:10, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Figfires: Thanks for taking a look at this article. How do these changes look? I went ahead and implemented your suggestions.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 14:40, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Gen. Quon: Looks fine now. I will pass it once I get home. Figfires^{Send me a message!} 16:57, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
^ Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.
^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
^ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
^ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.

[1] Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.

[2] Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.

[3] This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.

[4] Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.

[5] Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.

[6] The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]