Jump to content

Talk:Flight (Grey's Anatomy)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleFlight (Grey's Anatomy) has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 24, 2012Good article nomineeListed

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Flight (Grey's Anatomy)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: TBrandley (talk · contribs) 01:51, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll offer a review shortly. TBrandley 04:18, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Flight" is the twenty-fourth and final episode of the eighth season" how about: ""Flight" is the twenty-fourth and eighth season finale". How about that?
  • File:Derek Shepherd's Bloody Hand.jpg is adding absolutely nothing unless noted. There's no automatic entitlement for screenshots in episode articles, and so they are needed only when they themselves are significant when they are commented by critics, or are in "Production". Unless the rationale is beefed up, when it is not easy to describe, it has to be removed
  • "24th". Do you mean: "twenty-fourth"
  • Add comma after Shonda Rhimes. A little picky there
  • "The episode was originally broadcast" → "The episode originally aired"
  • Link Seattle
  • "The episode marked Leigh's and Raver's final appearance to the series." should be ""Flight" marked the last appearance of Leigh and Raver in the series."
  • "The episode opened to mixed reviews from television critics, with some criticizing the death of Lexie, but praising Leigh's performance" should be "The episode received to mixed reviews, with some commentators criticizing the death of Lexie, but praising Leigh's performance" too avoid using the same word too many times, with already know its by television critics/commentators.
  • Just mention the regular Nielsen rating, the other fantasy content can be in the real "Reception" article
  • "Thursday's No. 1 drama" overall. For critic reviews? For television ratings? For Nielsen ratings? Be more specific, please.
  • "their plane". Did they own the plane? If it was a commercial/airline flight, then re-word the grammar to "there"
  • "Dr. Meredith Grey (Ellen Pompeo), Dr. Lexie Grey (Chyler Leigh), Dr. Cristina Yang (Sandra Oh), Dr. Arizona Robbins (Jessica Capshaw), Dr. Derek Shepherd (Patrick Dempsey), and Dr. Mark Sloan (Eric Dane)". Just make a note example: "The team, etc."
  • Link Seattle for first time in "Plot" section
  • Rather than "very first episode" use "pilot episode"
  • "Featured music included The Paper Kites' "Featherstone"" could that be expanded upon. If it can't, that is okay. Please look though.
  • "Big Bear Lake, California". Link Big Bear Lake to Big Bear Lake, California, and then link California to the same link as a completely different link
  • "Rhimes commented before it aired". I'd imagine I aired a number of times (maybe not yet, but). Please write "originally aired, originally broadcast, etc."
  • The whole "Production" needs to be paraphrased. If you can't do it, request for help. Too many quotes, not a enough regular quotes, as per WP:PARAPHRASE. Thank you.
  • Side quote doesn't need "" marks as we know it a quote
  • "The episode received mixed to positive reviews among television critics". Re-write to: "The episode received mixed to positive reviews from television critics"
  • "mixed to positive". In the lead, it says only "mixed". Which is it? Very confusing to me.
  • Link the previous episode
  • "it outperformed the previous episode in terms of both viewership and ratings". Is there a citation for that? If not, please remove the info"
    • The opening sentence is a summary of the paragraph to come. The citation is given here: "The episode was watched by a total of 11.44 million Americans,[8] a 1.62% increase from the previous episode "Migration", which garnered 9.82 million viewers.[9]" and here: "In addition to its rating being in the top rankings for the night, it was an increase from the previous episode, which netted a 3.5/10 rating/share in the 18–49 demographic.[9]" where it compares the two episodes. TRLIJC19 (talk) 05:37, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • ""Flight" was originally broadcast on May 17, 2012 in the United States on the American Broadcasting Company (ABC).". Per the above wording it should be: ""Flight" originally aired on the American Broadcasting Company (ABC) in the United States on May 17, 2012."
  • There are some too specific details. Example: "The episode also showed an increase in ratings in comparison to the previous year's finale, which attained a 3.6/9 rating/share in the 18–49 demographic."
    • A comparison to the previous season finale is not unnecessary detail; it is broad coverage (a requirement for GAs). I could understand the issue if I was comparing it to a season premiere. TRLIJC19 (talk) 05:37, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Something different. How about: "Writing for Entertainment Weekly, X, etc" for the "Reception" section
  • Ref. 7, 12: Digital Spy's publisher should be Nat Mags
  • Watch out for doubled periods in the references, most notably on the Time, Inc.'s which is caused by cite template glitches caused by it.
  • IMDb before TV.com

My main concern is paraphrasing for the "Production" section with the article. Other concerns are pretty minor. It is a well-written article though, so great work on all of your current work. This article will be put on hold until the concerns are addressed. TBrandley 04:58, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) All done or replied to. TRLIJC19 (talk) 05:37, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
GA review
(see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):
    b (citations to reliable sources):
    c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):
    b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
    b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

Overall:
Pass/Fail:

· · ·
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Flight (Grey's Anatomy). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:43, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Flight (Grey's Anatomy). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:51, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]