Talk:It's On Bitch/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Prism (talk · contribs) 13:36, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
General overview
[edit]Disambiguation links
[edit]- Not present.
External links (per Checklinks)
[edit]- It denotes one indeterminate-class link, under 'Status', linking to E! Online.
- I'm not sure why, but every single reference I use for E! Online, regardless of what article, has this issue. I checked it out and it works on my end, should I just leave it as-is?
- You can leave it. prism △ 17:15, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
- I'm not sure why, but every single reference I use for E! Online, regardless of what article, has this issue. I checked it out and it works on my end, should I just leave it as-is?
Usage of files in article
[edit]- Two free images that have a vaild rationale.
- One non-free image that has a valid rationale as well.
Original research; reliable sourcing
[edit]Production
[edit]- The first reference used in that section (cite episode format) is acceptable, though, but not for technical details, I think. Is there any reliable source that names the producers?
- There is IMDb, although that's not really considered a reliable source, and unfortunately I can't find another source aside from those two. Would you like me to provide IMDb anyways (since producers don't really seem like information someone can screw up)?
- No, it's fine this way. prism △ 17:16, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
- There is IMDb, although that's not really considered a reliable source, and unfortunately I can't find another source aside from those two. Would you like me to provide IMDb anyways (since producers don't really seem like information someone can screw up)?
Release and reception
[edit]- Though probably there aren't many reviews of this episode online, but only Los Angeles Times and Movieline seem reliable. Could you try to find some more reviews?
Done; I got about three quality reviews (there were several more online, but unfortunately they were all from Examiner.com.)
Prose, redundancies and visual aspect
[edit]Plot
[edit]- Several redundancies: Remove all instances of the MTV reference except for the one in the last paragraph.
- Done
Production
[edit]- Could you please insert {{-}} to prevent the images of overlapping the Reception and release section?
- Done
Release and reception
[edit]- "three million viewers April 6, 2009" → missing preposition "on" between "viewers" and "April"?
- Done
Comments
[edit]- As usual, the article is well written and there aren't major problems with it, but just look at the things I pointed out above... 13:36, 3 January 2014 (UTC) Placing on hold as of now. prism △ 13:36, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Second read-through
[edit]- Nothing to further address. Passing, congratulations! prism △ 17:21, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you very much! WikiRedactor (talk) 20:38, 3 January 2014 (UTC)