Talk:No More Mr. Nice Guy (House)

No More Mr. Nice Guy (House) has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 19, 2008	Guild of Copy Editors	Copyedited
October 20, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed

Current status: Good article

Television: Episode coverage / House Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.
	This article is supported by the House task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Sultec, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 19 October,2008.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

Nurse strike vs. Writer strike

Is the nurse strike in this episode a reflection of the writer strike that led to the delay of many TV Series with House among, since both can be seen as vital part of the of the company they work for and do not get enough credit for it. Should it be put in the article and how? Or has there acturally been a nurse strike in the USA (I'm from Germany so I wouldn't know). Stipa (talk) 23:33, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is a reflection of the writer's strike. One of the references I added talks about it a little bit but I think there are more. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contributions) 16:31, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chagas Disease

Chagas disease is not curable, the chapter script lies about the possibility of a full recovery. The parasite is a very big public health issue in Andean South America. I wonder why they just don't mention the problem and end the chapter with a smile. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.232.94.33 (talk) 20:33, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Probably all true, but we need a third party source like a newspaper than mentions chaga's disease in relation to the house episode to use it. Here's a good place to look.[1] - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 20:48, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I chalk it up to poetic license, just like having doctors clean up bedridden patients - You'll never see that in real life. --Sultec (talk) 07:41, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Chagas' disease article in this Encyclopedia not an idle source to point that out? In the article is clear that no cure is available. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.244.23.106 (talk) 22:48, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The rule against it is Wikipedia:No original research. Basically, we're not supposed to be making the decision that its incurability is important enough to mention in the article. There's lots of true things you can say about the article, but an independant source needs to tell us which true things are important enough to include. Without references, a link to chagas is all we should do. Like I said, if you look through the sources I linked to, you may just find the article that says it should be mentioned. I'm not interested enough to really look myself, but if you find a source I am willing to help you add it. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 00:21, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:No More Mr. Nice Guy (House)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

The first two sentences start with "No More Mr. Nice Guy". Some variation would help.
"The episode revolves around, Dr. House (Hugh Laurie), noticing a man named Jeff (Paul Rae), in the ER, who he thinks is "too nice"." - commalicious...but most aren't necessary: "The episode revolves around Dr. House (Hugh Laurie) noticing a man named Jeff (Paul Rae) in the ER, who he thinks is "too nice".
"what's wrong" -> "what is wrong"
ER should be spelled out in full, at least the first time: "Emergency Room (ER)"
The episode gained mixed reviews from critics, Mary McNamara of the L.A. Times, stated that the episode was "The worst House episode ever". - two sentences are joined with a comma, and there is no need for the comma after "Times". In addition, the name of the newspaper should be spelled out in full.
While Gina Dinunno of TV Guide commented that she thought the episode was pretty good. - this is an incomplete sentence
"House finds Jeff's extreme niceness and inability to get angry a major symptom of an underlying condition" - I would imagine that at this point, he would "suspect", not "find" the niceness to be a symptom.
"When Kutner questions the couple" - three things: referring to him just by his last name is too informal, the actors real name should be in parentheses, and he "asks" the couple ("questions" doesn't fit in grammatically with the words that follow it)
"which could lead to syphilis, Deb denies it, stating that it is just the way her husband behaves, and it is impossible for her to not love him" - two sentences joined with commas
"Jeff, the husband of one of the nurses, Deb, collapses" - the way "Deb" is included in this sentence is awkward
"At the same time, House is annoyed he isn't getting enough time with his friend Wilson, and attempts to negotiate with Wilson's girlfriend Amber the conditions they can have Wilson's company." - I had to read this sentence a few times before I understood it. A few things: "House is annoyed because he is not getting..."; "and he attempts to..."; the rest of the sentence just needs to be rephrased; the actor's real names should be in parentheses; referring to the characters by their lasts names is too informal.
"They are at a standstill, thus House seeks Cuddy's resolution, however, she will only lay out the conditions if House does his team's performance reviews, knowing that he hates doing paperwork." - confusing run-on sentence
"House summarily has Foreman do the team reviews, instead." - "summarily" isn't needed; the name of the actor who plays Foreman should be included; Foreman should not be referred to by last name alone.

I'm going to stop there and request that the article be copyedited before the review proceeds. I recommend finding an editor who has not worked on the article, so that a set of fresh eyes will have an objective first look.

A quick glance over the rest shows:

"The nurse-strike in the episode was a pun" - it is not a "pun"; please look up the definiton of "pun"
The quotation from the Chicago Tribune doesn't need to be offset, and the prose should mention/discuss the review rather than just giving a quotation.
"tuesday and wednesday" - capitalize days
The "worst House episode ever" quotation is repeated. I recommend not using the quotation in the lead, but summarize or paraphrase it.
The article mentions an Emmy nomination, but the Emmy nominations article doesn't show anything from House being nominated.
When more than one reference is used in the same place, they should be in numerical order ([3][4], not [4][3]).
I don't believe that the picture of Wilson meets the Fair Use requirements, as the article does not comment on his appearance specifically. A copyrighted picture can't be used just for visual identification.
I believe that the infobox picture needs to be re-uploaded at a smaller size in order to meet the Fair Use requirements (see Template:Non-free image data)
"the episode was pretty good" - "pretty good" isn't encyclopedic prose

This is not a comprehensive list, but it should give a good idea of what the problems are. I will place it on hold to allow for copyediting and for these concerns to be addressed and/or discussed. Any questions or concerns can be left here, as I have placed this page on my watchlist. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 05:50, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

Hi, I've taken care off pretty much everything you asked above, I'll contact a Copy-Editor A.S.A.P. and I'll make the image smaller when I find some spare time. One note though, I don't get what you mean with the sentence "thought the episode was "pretty good"" being incomplete.

Thank you for your review.--Music26/11 19:37, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not incomplete, but it is weak writing. "Pretty" isn't the best choice of adjectives. GaryColemanFan (talk) 22:35, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply and for your work on the article. To be honest, the copyediting helped, but quite a few grammatical issues were left. I went through the article and did a quick copyedit. I also noticed that one of the references was going to expire soon, so I created a permanent archive of the page through Webcite and included it in the citation. I believe that the article meets the six GA criteria. If you have any questions or comments about this review, please get in touch. If you feel that I have overstepped my boundaries as a reviewer, please feel free to ask for a second opinion on this review at WT:GAN (please note that GA reviewers are encouraged to fix minor problems, but some editors prefer reviewers to list concerns rather than addressing them directly).

With all that said, congratulations! I appreciate your hard work on this article, and I hope the results are satisfying. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 05:56, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyediting

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on No More Mr. Nice Guy (House). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:09, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]