Jump to content

Talk:Mr. Monk and the Airplane/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Johanna (talk · contribs) 16:37, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Third on my "to review" list. Johanna (formerly BenLinus1214)talk to me!see my work 16:37, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lead
  • "In this episode, Monk solves a case in an airport." Expand?
  • In the second paragraph, replace one of the "it's" with the title of the episode.
Plot
  • I think it should be "practical nurse"--pratical isn't a word.
  • "Meanwhile, Bernard turns up dead, supposedly due to a heart attack but Monk is not so sure." Informal
  • "Stefan and his mistress murdered Barbara" is this his speculation, or is this proved to be true at that point in the episode?
  • For consistency, either refer to her as "Barbara" or "Chabrol"--I would prefer Barbara.
Production
  • No comma in the first sentence.
  • "over the setting" probably add "for the episode."
  • Comma between "plane" and "but"
  • Any details on what the "Pete and Repeat" joke is?
  • "Garry Marshall himself created Warren Beach's trademark line" This is a bit of an abrupt transition, and I don't know from this whether he's a one-off guest star, recurring character, etc.
Reception
  • "among his three favorite episodes" of what? The season? The series? The year?
  • I honestly think that you can include more parts of all the reviews, as this will expand the reception section and give a clearer idea of all the reviews.
  • It's not so much a matter of squeezing in stuff as it is actually fleshing out the opinion of each reviewer. To be clearer on some of each one's main points, you could read the reviews and then quote or summarize some of the most important parts. Johanna (formerly BenLinus1214)talk to me!see my work 02:33, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • With "squeezed" I meant I've extracted the most of the sources. I really feel this way. Let's see: Bianculi (a) discuss more the show itself so most of it is not worth mentioning; McDonough basically only describes its plot and guest stars; TelevisionWeek comments more on the background of the episode than the episode itself; Smith is reviewing the third season opening and he only uses "Airplane" to compare it with "Manhattan"; Hicks is reviewing season 1 DVD and has only one mention to "Airplane"; Bianculli (b) and Press also only do one mention to it. Gabriel Yuji (talk) 17:36, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is there any more information surrounding the Emmy?

@Gabriel Yuji: Looks good! Just a few things to do before I can pass. Johanna (formerly BenLinus1214)talk to me!see my work 21:29, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Johanna. My replies are above. Gabriel Yuji (talk) 01:52, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Gabriel Yuji: Nice work! I can pass now. Johanna (formerly BenLinus1214)talk to me!see my work 19:09, 14 September 2015 (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, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mr._Monk_and_the_Airplane/GA1&oldid=1061533961"