Jump to content

Talk:Pilot (The Blacklist)/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) 22:10, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Second on my "to review" list. Johanna (formerly BenLinus1214)talk to me!see my work 22:10, 2 September 2015 (UTC) @Rp0211: Comments[reply]

  • Most people will know that Pilot means it's the first episode, and first episode of the first season is a little clunky--take a look at Pilot (Glee) and Pilot (Veronica Mars) and use whichever construction you prefer.  Done
  • "long-thought-dead" is too complicated and not worded very well. Also, after "long-thought-dead terrorist", put a comma.  Done
  • In the lead, include a summary of the material in the production section as well.  Done
  • "She confronts Reddington to find out what he knows." Does the episode end there? If so, add at the end, "before fading to black, ending the episode on a cliffhanger" or something like that.  Done
  • "Background" and "Production" should be one section, traditionally called "Production".  Done
  • Is the correct term greenlighted or greenlit? I actually don't know…  Done
It is "green-lit" according to dictionary.com. Rp0211 (talk2me)
  • I don't find the publishers in web sources to be that necessary, and they get kind of redundant after a while. Obviously, keep the work parameter though.  Not done
Publishers are okay in the references section as long as the same subsequent sources are not wiki-linked. Rp0211 (talk2me)
Okay, I didn't know that. I personally don't like them but they can stay. Johanna (formerly BenLinus1214)talk to me!see my work 23:28, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Looking pretty good! The only major thing I would say is the reviews thing. Johanna (formerly BenLinus1214)talk to me!see my work 20:30, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I addressed all of the points that you listed above. Rp0211 (talk2me) 21:08, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Rp0211: Congratulations! I can definitely pass now. Nice work! Johanna (formerly BenLinus1214)talk to me!see my work 23:28, 11 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: