Talk:Northwest Passage (Fringe)/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Starstriker7(Talk) 04:15, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
I will review this one. --Starstriker7(Talk) 04:15, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
- If you'd like to find the specific locations, you can use the find aspect of your browser. This can usually be accessed using Control+F or Apple+F.
Prose issues (Criterion 1a [clear prose])
[edit]Lead
[edit]- continuing to stay away --> as he continues to stay away?
- Fixed
Plot
[edit]- How does Peter go from being a suspect to being one who aids in the investigation? This should be clarified.
- "but he gets away --> but he escapes.
- "took place; a dairy farm" --> Is that the correct use of a semicolon?
- "Meanwhile back in Boston" --> "Meanwhile, back"
- All fixed
Manual of style issues (Criterion 1b [Lead, Layout, Words to Watch, Fiction, List Incorporation])
[edit]Lead
[edit]- The lead doesn't mention anything about the Cultural references section. A mention should be made to encompass all sections of the article.
- The lead already mentioned Twin Peaks, but I reworded it to say the episode has references to the series, not similarities
Layout
[edit]- In the edit window, there is an extra white space between the Cultural references and Reception sections. This should be cut to one white space.
- Didn't see the extra space on my edit window
Fiction
[edit]- The plot should be rewritten completely in present tense.
- "is kidnapped and murdered."
- "Peter was involved"
- "where the murders took place"
- "They find the owner, who confesses to killing the women because they rejected him, and kidnapped and tortured Mathis's partner when he discovered the culprit"
- "is approached by Newton"
- "The man is revealed"
- "After they ask why he didn't come"
- I attempted to make a few tense changes, but I think the plot is all present tense already
Information and source issues (Criterion 2a [All information is cited; sections in proper position])
[edit]- 1 is from a blog, but the blog appears to be written by a trusted author. I believe that this is excusable.
- 3 is also from a blog. I am not sure if this is reliable. Try to replace this one.
- http://watching-tv.ew.com/2010/05/07/fringe-season-2-episode-21/ 11] also feels like a blog. Ken Tucker seems reliable enough, but it still doesn't sit very well with me.
- All three sources are very common and reliable, and I use them all the time with no trouble. To persuade you, I recently had an in-depth FAC and not one editor questioned those three sources' reliability. Also, all three websites are written by paid columnists, not just a random guy with a blog.
Contentious material and citation issues (Criterion 2b [Controversial/Contentious material cited; inline citations used])
[edit]- The formatting for ref 6 (Jackson, Joshua, Martha Plimpton) is unequal. I'm fairly certain that it should be formatted either like "Joshua Jackson; Martha Plimpton" or "Jackson, Joshua; Plimpton, Martha."
- Fixed to Jackson, Joshua; Plimpton, Martha
Original research issues (Criterion 2c [No original research])
[edit]None to report.
Broadness issues (Criterion 3a [All main concepts addressed])
[edit]- For such a popular episode, I'm surprised it didn't garner any awards. Are you certain that none were won (or nominated)?
I have not seen any, but I'll do another google search for someAfter a google search, I failed to find any awards or nominations for the episode, unfortunately. I think it definitely deserved some though :/ Just another case of the series being criminally ignored by award-givers
Focus issues (Criterion 3b [Stays focused; need not the unnecessary detail])
[edit]It seems alright in this aspect.
Neutrality issues (Criterion 4 [No undue weight to certain viewpoints])
[edit]No problems here.
Stability issues (Criterion 5 [No edit warring, etc.])
[edit]All quiet on the Western front.
Image copyright issues (Criterion 6a [Images properly tagged, licensed, etc. if content is free-use])
[edit]There is one fair-use image, and it is properly tagged and licensed.
Image relevance issues (Criterion 6b [Images relevant and with good captions])
[edit]The Plimpton image seems a little on the tangential side, but I'll run with it anyways.
Overall comments
[edit]Nice work fixing up this article as such, Ruby. I'm going to put this on hold for now after the comments I've placed are resolved. --Starstriker7(Talk) 06:00, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for the review! It is much appreciated (especially with the awful backlog GA has now). Thanks again, Ruby2010 comment! 15:31, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
- Of course! I think you've addressed all my comments to my satisfaction. I'll hunt for the extra space in a sec, but this article looks ready to pass. Again, good work on this one! --Starstriker7(Talk) 19:37, 29 May 2011 (UTC)