Talk:Pest of the West/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Gen. Quon (talk · contribs) 22:49, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image: "…playing in a Western desert of Dead Eye Gulch." -> I feel that 'of' should either be 'in' or 'near', or something similar. 'of' just doesn't sound right.
- Done. Mediran (t • c) 05:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Plot: "…have famous relatives who had helped Bikini Bottom." Helped the city do what?
- Done. Mediran (t • c) 05:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Plot: "…named Krusty Kantina…" add 'the' between 'named' and 'Krusty'
- Done. Mediran (t • c) 05:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Plot: Any idea why SpongeBuck has to face Dead Eye Plankton? Did he get challenged to a duel?
- Done? Mediran (t • c) 05:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Plot: "Pecos Patrick tells to defeat Dead Eye Plankton, SpongeBuck must smack him several times." What? There's something wrong here…
- Done.. Mediran (t • c) 05:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Plot: Did SpongeBuck step on Dead Eye accidentally, or on purpose? Maybe clarify.
- Done. Mediran (t • c) 05:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Production: The second sentence of the first paragraph really belongs in the "Reception" section
- Done. Mediran (t • c) 05:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Production: "…audience[…] And" There needs to be a space between 'audience' and the bracket. Also, decapitalize the 'A' in 'And'
- Done. Mediran (t • c) 05:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Production: All of the talk on how Nickelodeon promoted the episode on the internet really belongs in the "Reception" section, as well
- Why do you think so? I think the "promotion" is part of the episode's production. Mediran (t • c) 05:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Produciton: "The featured song in the episode called "Idiot Friends", performed in the epilogue, was…" -> "The song featured in the episode's epilogue, "Idiot Friends", was…"
- Done. Mediran (t • c) 05:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Production: There's hardly an info on production in this section. It's mostly info on the episode's airing, and DVD release. This is a problem.
- Added some. Do you think it's OK now? Mediran (t • c) 05:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Cultural references: "featured" should be "features"
- Done. Mediran (t • c) 05:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Cultural references: "Other western conventions in films get spoofed, as well." Like what? Please expand upon this, or remove it.
- Removed. Mediran (t • c) 05:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Reception: "shoot" is too un-encyclopedic. Maybe use "raise" or "move"; same goes for "handily", just remove that word.
- Done. Mediran (t • c) 05:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Reception: "Mavis cited his favorite line: "I'll bet you're somebody's famous poop-covered ancestor."" This is just kind of out-of-the-blue. It doesn't really add to the reception section, and it doesn't even identify who said it
- Removed. Mediran (t • c) 05:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Reception: I feel uncomfortable called either Yahoo! Voices or Blogcritics reliable sources, since they have little to no editorial oversight. Every time I remember trying to use them in an article, I was told to remove them.
If we decide to keep the two, "Dunces and Dragons" needs quotes around it

Furthermore, the whole "Blogcritics reviewer's kid wants to know if they had an ancestor", while cute, doesn't add anything to the episode or its reception, so I suggest you remove it
- I think the two should be kept. Fixed Dunces an... Mediran (t • c) 05:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Reception: "…was negative on the DVD…" -> negative towards, negative about, etc. "on" is just the wrong preposition to use.
- Done. Mediran (t • c) 05:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Reception: The segue from the negative review (DVD Verdict) to the review about the song seems a little abrupt. I'd move the info about the song to another paragraph.
- Thanks. :) Mediran (t • c) 05:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
References: You can link a lot of the works/publishers in the references, such as Zap2it, Newswire, AllMusic, Entertainment Weekly, Deseret News, Chicago Sun-Times, etc.
- Done. Mediran (t • c) 05:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
References: What's with the British style dating (DD MM YYYY)? I used to do that too, but since this is an American article, it's preferred that the dates be MM, DD YYYY.
- Done. Mediran (t • c) 05:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All in all, there are quite a few prose issues. Also, I'm worrying about the near lack of production information. I will place this on hold for seven days for the changes to be made.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 02:00, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much Gen. Quon for the review! I hope the article is OK now to pass GAC. Also, I have added some prod info. Thanks! :) Mediran (t • c) 05:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It looks a lot better now. Now that there is a merchandising section, I think maybe the DVD info should be moved there.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 17:08, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. :) Mediran (t • c) 09:05, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. I will pass.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 20:10, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much Gen. Quon! :) Cheers! Mediran (t • c) 09:40, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]