Talk:Motherhood (ER)/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: RunningTiger123 (talk · contribs) 22:23, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Having written several GAs about TV episodes, I'll give this review a go. I should have my comments up in the next day or so. RunningTiger123 (talk) 22:23, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

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:
· · ·

Comments:

• 1a
  • "Motherhood" was written by ... filming From Dusk till Dawn. – This sentence runs on and should probably be split up.
  • On set, the director ... it was "their show." – Also runs too long; split it up
  • "Blackbird" is accidentally wikilinked twice in the synopsis.
  • The IMDb link should be written as "Motherhood", not Motherhood.
  • Add an en dash between Script and Archived in External links.

 Done Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 17:06, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

• 1b
  • The maintenance tag says to use dmy dates, but the article mixes mdy dates in the text with dmy dates in the citations. Pick one or the other and, if needed, correct the tag. (From what I've seen, mdy is more common for articles written in American English.)

 Fixed Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 17:06, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

• 2b
  • Source 1 compares the roof scene to Reservoir Dogs, but it doesn't say critics also made the comparison, so change the wording in the image caption to reflect this.
  • Link source 4 to the specific slide with the information (slide 16) so verifying it is easier.
  • Provide page number for source 5.
  • Peary is the editor for source 5, not the author.
  • I'll assume source 8 is valid since I can't find it online – but if possible, provide a link to a database with the information.
  • Saying "tame" for source 15 somewhat misrepresents what the article says. It says that the episode tamed Tarantino's tendencies, not that it was itself tame.
  • Source 16 seems completely misrepresented to me. I'm not convinced it's a negative review, so I would cut that description out. (Maybe the rest of the interview on later pages clarifies his stance better; I'm just going off what I see at the link provided.)
  • After reading all of these reviews, I think that "mixed reviews" is the wrong summary. To me, they seemed generally positive; the notes that Tarantino's style didn't stand out could be taken as both a compliment and a criticism, so I would have a remark about it in the lead but not necessarily link it to whether or not critics liked it. We can discuss this further if you want; you probably know more about the episode than me, so I'd really appreciate your thoughts on this.

 Done Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 17:06, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

• 4: See comments regarding sources in 2b.

— RunningTiger123 (talk) 16:37, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

@RunningTiger123: All your suggestions have been addressed. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 17:06, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Awesome! Passing shortly. On a side note, I never realized Tarantino had done TV work and thought this was really interesting. RunningTiger123 (talk) 18:11, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.