Talk:Backrooms (web series)/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Failed. — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 02:45, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

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

Nominator: Not0nshoree (talk · contribs) 15:35, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Vortex3427 (talk · contribs) 09:00, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Huh, this is an article now. Maybe we should have one on Kane Pixels! There are some glaring issues with this one which need to be fixed before we can proceed:

For reader and editor convenience, the YouTube video should have spotchecks. It's easier to find moments in the video by opening the transcript (at the bottom of the description) and Ctrl+F'ing relevant terms.
I recommend you have another cursory search of Google News. There's a lot of content which isn't included on this article, including an article on Parsons from Dazed and an overview from Collider. Is there any information on the break which has lasted over a year?
Please use less quotes (paraphrase more) and try to keep use of primary sources to a minimum. You can also condense the plot summaries more. Some of these episodes are less than a minute long, after all.

On second thought, I'm going to have to fail this article. Probably half the available sources (including an academic article analyzing the series) aren't used. It's messily organized, and reading the body doesn't make sense chronologically (so it goes from posting the first video straight to reception without discussing any of the subsequent episodes?). Some of the sources that are included are misrepresented: a quote from Parsons is given as a quote from the ABC News journalist, for example. Most of the article is plot summary and is still short. The title should be changed: there's no indication that the series is called Backrooms and the playlist is called "The Backrooms".

This article could probably be a GA in the future, but it needs a huge amount of work.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.