Talk:Alpha (The X-Files)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Grapple X (talk · contribs) 06:21, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Oh, piss, the dog one. This one's even worse than Millennium's dog one.

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
"He hears another dog in his backyard and he runs it off." -> You run off a cramp, I'd say "chases it off" would work better here.

Done

Having been raised on Lovecraft, I was initially wary about linking dhole, but I see it's actually relevant. Is there any indication that this was a deliberate use of the real-life term? Doesn't matter if it hasn't been mentioned but it would be a nice addition.
I couldn't find any info on this. in the Meisler book, it seems that they just pulled it out of thin air.

"who is revealed to have glowing red eyes" -> It's not so much a dramatic reveal as a visual cue. Maybe "who is seen to have", or "who looks at him with glowing red eyes" or something to that effect.
Done

There's probably too many uses of "dog" to follow this properly, it also reads poorly as a result. Use "Wangshang Dhole" or even just "Dhole" where possible, to vary things a bit and keep the prose fresher.
Done I think it reads a bit better now.

"Detweiler-as-a-dog enters" -> "Detweiler, as a dog, enters"
Done

"The wife of Peter Markle—who happened to direct the episode—was later cast in the role." -> do you know if this is deliberate or a coincidence? It would clarify things to know if Markle was attached as director indepently of his wife being cast; or if he, as director, helped the casting. If the source doesn't give an answer either way then ignore this.
Done The source did mention that is was a coincidence

Might be worth mentioning that a certain mister Carter is from the episode's setting, Bellflower, California. If you have nothing to cite that, I think I can dig it up in the Edwards book.
I'll look in my book again. I don't know if it mentioned it.
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
There's a lot of consecutive occurrences of ref 2, could be folded together.
I only have those spread out because they're citing direct quotations, which I believe require distinct references
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Bit of a bummer to see there's only one review. I'll have a look online tomorrow and see if I can find anything in various newspaper archives, to help build that up a bit more.
~~I'll look too, but that's all I could find.~~

OK, was able to find one from i09. How many do you think we need?
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Grand.
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Grand.
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:
File:Alpha x files.jpg could do with a stronger FUR, just something to tie it specifically to this article. Perhaps mention how the dog a) was the initial impetus for the whole episode and b) seems to have taken flak from a reviewer for being boring. Given both points, it can then be seen that the image represents the whole episode.
Done
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
Few issues here, hopefully I'll be able to help with the crit 3 stuff tomorrow. Going to put this one on hold for now and go to bed, let's see if we can get it done before the weekend's out. GRAPPLE X 06:21, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I got most of them taken care of. Will work on the rest too.--Gen. Quon (talk) 15:24, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Turned up plenty of stuff for other articles, but unfortunately nothing for this one. Should be grand without, we can always add to it if something turns up. Going to pass it now. GRAPPLE X 16:59, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]