Talk:Magnum P.I. (2018 TV series) season 1/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Some Dude From North Carolina (talk · contribs) 14:26, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I'll will be giving your article an assessment based on the GA-criteria. Some Dude From North Carolina^{wanna talk?} 14:26, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The lead seems perfect all the way until the last sentence. I suggest adding the year after "September 27."
Cast section passes per MOS:TVCAST. Some Dude From North Carolina^{wanna talk?} 14:26, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
First season articles usually don't have a "No. in season" column, as it's the same as the column before it titled "No. overall." To fix this, I suggest editing the episode table and removing both "|overall=" and "|EpisodeNumber2 =". Some Dude From North Carolina^{wanna talk?} 14:26, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Archive all archivable sources. Some Dude From North Carolina^{wanna talk?} 14:26, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Added the year after September 27, and archived and all available sources. In my experience first season articles always have both numbers. Hawaii Five-0 (2010 TV series, season 1), MacGyver (2016 TV series, season 1) are both good articles I have worked with promoting that have them (other examples: Superstore (season 1), Pretty Little Liars (season 1), Grey's Anatomy (season 1), Stranger Things (season 1) I could go on). The only time the first season doesn't have both numbers in my experience is where the first season is the only season (Me, Myself & I (TV series), Pretty Little Liars: The Perfectionists) or until a second season table can be added (Lego Masters (American TV series)). TheDoctorWho (talk) 01:38, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Episode description lengths are good enough and pass MOS:TVPLOT. Some Dude From North Carolina^{wanna talk?} 02:38, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Reference [72] (from TVLine) is archivable. Some Dude From North Carolina^{wanna talk?} 02:38, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The reference that follows "Both Amy Hill and Kang debuted in the seasons third episode" in the casting section should be replaced with a reliable source. Some Dude From North Carolina^{wanna talk?} 02:38, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In the reception section, "Deadline Hollywood" and "USA Today" should be in italics. Some Dude From North Carolina^{wanna talk?} 02:41, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest changing "Rotten Tomatoes, a review aggregator website" to something similar to "On review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes," so its easier for people to read and understand. Some Dude From North Carolina^{wanna talk?} 02:41, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In development, I suggest changing "a Category 4 hurricane, in Hawaii CBS" to "a Category 4 hurricane in Hawaii, CBS". Some Dude From North Carolina^{wanna talk?} 13:44, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As the hurricane information in the development section affected filming, I would move it all to "filming". Some Dude From North Carolina^{wanna talk?} 13:44, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In casting "Deadline Hollywood" should be in italics. Some Dude From North Carolina^{wanna talk?} 13:44, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
To improve consistency in the "release and marketing" section, I suggest changing "EST" to "ET". Some Dude From North Carolina^{wanna talk?} 13:44, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also in that section, I would change "airing on 20 episodes" to "airing for 20 episodes" or "airing 20 episodes". Some Dude From North Carolina^{wanna talk?} 13:44, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest adding the season's Rotten Tomatoes critical consensus and Metacritic's "Season 1 Overview". Some Dude From North Carolina^{wanna talk?} 13:44, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Per MOS:CAPS, change references [68] and [78] so they're not in all caps.
In the reception section, "Magnum P.I." should be in italics.
I know this isn't common in most articles, but to be consistent, I suggest changing the section title "Release and marketing" to "Marketing and release".

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: 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:
· · ·