Talk:Lifeline (Stargate Atlantis)/GA1

GA Review

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

Hold. The opening sentence needs a little cleaning up, the production section seems a little trivial, External links should have some capitols, also "The episode received slightly lower ratings from the last episode, but was still well received" might need a reference. See also this message on the talk page ISTHnR | Knock Knock | Who's There? 05:25, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't understand, would you mind elaborating on what you mean by the production section seems a little trivial (maybe show an example or two)? As for looking through the talk page, this took place before the article was merged, and that doesn't seem to be helpful ever since I recreated it. The last sentence on the lead doesn't really need a ref; they are sourced in the reception section already. As for the others, I'll see what I can do for tomorrow. -- Matthew R Dunn (talk) 23:32, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't know, I appears to meet the criteria, I think it is ready for GA status ---Scarce |||| You shouldn't have buried me, I'm not dead--- 02:59, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

New GA Review

As I am not sure what happened to the original reviewer, I am going to start a GA review for this article anew. Please leave any comments you may have below. Thanks! Vicenarian ^{(T · C)} 19:03, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

GA Review - Pass

Having thoroughly read through the article and making some changes, I believe it is almost ready to be listed as a GA. However, there are two slightly confusing sentences that concern me:

"Another reason that Carter's appearance was small was that Torri Higginson was still a part of the show, and she didn't want the two to have big parts."

Is this saying that Higginson did not want both Weir and Carter to have large parts in the show? Why?

Listened to the commentary again, Tapping and the producers didn't want two main characters compete against each other, and in order to introduce the character slowly. -- Matthew R Dunn (talk) 22:26, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

"While filming Weir guiding the team to find the ZPM, the fact that she can see "everything" without looking at anything was a hard sell for an actor, but with Higginson's drive in her eyes, the scene was made more believable, though it wasn't written in the script."

For whom was this a hard sell? For Higginson? Who thought the drive in Higginson's eye's made the scene more believable? Also Higginson? And the "drive in her eyes" was not written in the script?

For Higginson, well the commentary justy said "a hard sell for an actor", so it is a little vague. Martin Wood and, again the producers wanted to make it more believable for the viewers. The drive in her eyes was not written in the original script. -- Matthew R Dunn (talk) 22:26, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Both of these are from the commentary to the episode. As I don't own the DVD, I can't go back to the original source myself. I would appreciate it if someone with knowledge of/access to the commentary would review and clarify these sentences. Beyond this, I see nothing standing in he way of the article, so I am putting it ON HOLD for seven days so the corrections can be made. Thank you.

Vicenarian ^{(T · C)} 17:44, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the commentary doesn't provide me with all the answers, albeit vaguely describing them. Hope I make a little more sense with the replies above. I'll tweak them very soon. Sorry for the lateness, I quite often do things last minute. Thanks for reviewing. -- Matthew R Dunn (talk) 22:26, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Not a problem. I will allow additional time for tweaks to be made. Cheers, Vicenarian ^{(T · C)} 09:51, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I believe I did that last night, feel free to check the page history. -- Matthew R Dunn (talk) 16:53, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

With these changes, I believe the article meets the good article criteria and can be listed as a GA. Vicenarian ^{(T · C)} 23:03, 25 July 2009 (UTC)