Talk:Fata Morgana (Sanctuary)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ruslik_Zero 16:49, 24 January 2010 (UTC) Comments:[reply]

They also experience nightmares of destroying an entire village, and soon determines they are actually memories of them causing the destruction. Who "determines"? And who are "they" and "them"?
Reword sentence. "who", "they" and "them" are the sisters.
who caused the destruction 1,200 What does this mean? Ruslik_Zero 19:38, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The sisters caused the destruction 1,200 years ago. Just another grammar error on my clumsy part. -- Matthew R Dunn (talk) 19:44, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
and has infiltrated several major organisations worldwide since to continue their operation I suggest replacing "since" with "since then" and putting it before "has".
Done.
They also recently found out that the Sanctuary has captured the sisters. "Also" is not necessary here.
Removed.
Several Cabal mercenaries have captured several Keepers in Scotland, Two "several" in one sentence is overkill.
Replaced first "several" with "a group of".
Will teaches the sister about freedom, and sends them to a safehouse Did he teach only one sister?
Just an honest spelling error, Will actually taught all three of them.
Danu, Caird and Tatha turn themselves in, in exchange that they spare the team's lives. I do not like this sentence. Two "in"s separated by a comma and "that" in a strange place.
Reworded to "Danu, Caird and Tatha surrender to the mercanaries, in exchange they spare the team's lives."
~~After reading the 'Plot' section I still do not understand whether they were captured 1,200 years ago or recently?~~
They were captured 1,200 years ago, freed in the beginning of the episode, then captured by the Cabal in the end. Apoligies for a mess of a plot. Please let me know if you have more concerns/my rewords still don't make sense.
The episode attempted to show the tone of what Sanctuary is by giving it an ancient and mythological feel to it. One "it" is redundant.
Removed the it from "giving it an ancient mythological."
visual effects and character development were highly praised, but thought the Magnus and Ashley relationship a little forced. Who thought? There is no subject in this sentence. And there should be "is" (or was) some between "relationship" and "forced".
Tory Ireland Mell, the reveiwer thought, reword sentence.

I hope the concerns were taken care of. Please don't hesitate to tell me if there are others, or my rewords still don't make any sense. -- Matthew R Dunn (talk) 20:20, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am still not comfortable with general quality of the prose. A copy-edit is necessary. Ruslik_Zero 19:44, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copy edited entire article, does it need any further copy-edits in any part of the article? -- Matthew R Dunn (talk) 16:34, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I meant copy-edit by someone other than you. I also noticed:

The episode was originally aired on the Sci Fi Channel in the United States and The Movie Network in Canada on October 10, 2008. It was subsequently aired on ITV4 in the United Kingdom on October 20, 2008. This is not mentioned in the main text. Per WP:LEAD the leading part is a summary of the article. It can not contain anything that is not present in the main text.

I haven't had this trouble in all the previous GANs, but I included it in the the reception section.

It was originally released in some of the original webisodes in 2007 I do not like that 'original' is used twice in one sentence.

Removed first "originally", replaced with "first".

~~Why is 'Abnormal' capitalized? Is it a proper noun?~~

Uncapitalised.

the title serves as a reference to the Morrígan. Can you clarify what this means?

It wasn't elaborated from what I heard from the commentary. Should I remove that statement?

In this case it is better to remove it. Ruslik_Zero 16:24, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removed.

The team travel to a crypt Is not 'team' singular form?

Do you mean "the team travels"? If so, I changed this.

There other instances. Ruslik_Zero 16:24, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. -- Matthew R Dunn (talk) 17:34, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ruslik_Zero 18:38, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I shall ask around for the copy edit, if you still wish someone else copy-edit. -- Matthew R Dunn (talk) 21:22, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It would be desirable. Ruslik_Zero 16:24, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Asked another editor, now it's only a matter if that user would want to oblige or not. -- Matthew R Dunn (talk) 17:34, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have just noticed that the article was copy-edit, so, I will promote it. Ruslik_Zero 19:30, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]