Talk:One Hundred (Aqua Teen Hunger Force)

One Hundred (Aqua Teen Hunger Force) was nominated as a Sports and recreation good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (December 23, 2011). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

This article was nominated for deletion on 8 September 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Cartoon Network Low‑importance

	Cartoon Network portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cartoon Network, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to Cartoon Network on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Cartoon NetworkWikipedia:WikiProject Cartoon NetworkTemplate:WikiProject Cartoon NetworkCartoon Network articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Television: Episode coverage 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 (assessed as Low-importance).

Animation: American Low‑importance

	Animation portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the American animation work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Notable episode

Its the 100th episode of a notable show. Google news found a place talking about it, so I added that as a reference. Dream Focus 11:40, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

redirect errors

I noticed that instead of renaming the article with the Move tab, someone mistakenly created a new article with a similar name, and then copied over all the text to it, and put a redirect to it. I have undone that, and placed a redirect from there to here. Other shows have their episode articles with just the word (episode) there, there no need to mention anything else and making the title longer, unless two different shows have the same name for an episode of course. This preserves the edit history as well. The other article was redirected previously to a list article, despite having references proving it was notable. I spoke to the editor who made this mistake, pointing out it was not included in the batch of episodes at a recent AFD few people seemed to have noticed and participated in, because it is covered in third party independent reliable sources, thus whatever ruling was for those nominated article, does not affect it. Dream Focus 22:14, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Space Ghost Coast to Coast

The article says that ATHF is the only Adult Swim program to last at least 100 episodes, but SGC2C lasted 110 episodes. Carlathf (talk) 23:55, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, I'll change it. Grapesoda22 (talk) 16:51, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously

The article states "Frylock is obsessed with the number 100, which keeps appearing everywhere. This was a very obvious parody of the 2007 film, The Number 23. Frylock says that the Mayans invented the number, which is an obvious parody of the 2012 phenomenon." If both these parodies are obvious, why state it? Who cares?129.139.1.68 (talk) 20:57, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Savini

The image of Tom Savini says he voiced 100, but the rest of the page disagrees. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.92.174.27 (talk) 01:56, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:One Hundred (Aqua Teen Hunger Force)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MuZemike (talk · contribs) 22:56, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Prose issues

In the lead paragraph, you have "One Hundred" listed four times. Is there any way you can list "the episode" or "it" in subsequent mentionings?
You need to provide some sort of introduction into the "Plot" section, such as "The episode begins with..." or similar.
Master Shake then flies off to California ... so he deserves it. → The sentence is too long-winded and is causing me to lose track as to what is going on. Please split that sentence up and make it easier to understand.
A television executive replies that because Aqua Teen Hunger Force is only eleven minutes long, they only have fifty half-hours of material. → So a TV station only has 50 half-hours of material because ATHF is 11 minutes long? That doesn't make sense there.
Carl makes a brief appearance as well. → Is there a reason why he is mentioned separately from the characters in the previous sentence?
They all run into a monster, soon after Frylock unmasks the monster, who turns out to be One Hundred in disguise. → the part after the first comma is improper grammar form. That part needs to be rewritten.
Why is there a one-sentence paragraph at the end of the "Plot" section. Why can it not be in the previous paragraph?
All the paragraphs in the "Production" and "Release and reception" sections can easily be combined into one full paragraph.
I would merge the "Cultural references" section into another section, preferably tacked on at the end of the "Production" section.
The part about the IGN review needs to be rewritten completely. I cannot make if your simply narrating from the review itself or if you're actually trying to summarize what the reviewer felt.

Coverage issue

This article is sorely lacking in coverage and falls way short of WP:GACR#3a. At least I would expect much more than one review, and as such it's no wonder why this barely squeaked past AfD for notability.

Verifiability issues

You need something more reliable than IMDB, I'm afraid.
Frylock later makes reference to the 2012 phenomenon, when he says Mayans invented the number 100. → The 2012 phenomenon is not mentioned in the source. How do we know, just because Frylock says that the Mayans invented the number 100, that he's referencing to 2012?
[1] is unreliable (whereas this is better), and so is this. Both of those are strictly based off user-generated content. Now, that one in the middle is fine, but I would think you could use the Nielsen information itself (i.e. from their own reports or their site) to verify that.

Conclusions

On hold pending some improvements to the above issues, and hopefully some more substantive stuff can show up to rectify the coverage issues. Otherwise, I am leaning towards failing this GA nomination primairly on the basis of WP:GACR#3a. I'll keep it on hold for about a week and see what develops. –MuZemike 22:56, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Failed – I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to fail this GAN due to the issues above, which have not been addressed. Please work on them before considering another GA nomination. --MuZemike 05:10, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]