Talk:Ron and Tammy

Ron and Tammy 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.

Ron and Tammy is part of the Parks and Recreation (season 2) series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 13, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed
January 18, 2011	Good topic candidate	Promoted

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on November 13, 2009.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that "Ron and Tammy", an episode of NBC's Parks and Recreation, features comedienne Megan Mullally playing the ex-wife of a character played by her real-life husband, Nick Offerman?

Current status: Good article

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).

Comedy Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy 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.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ron and Tammy/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Xtzou (Talk) 16:12, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have a few questions/comments.

"In the episode, the library department tries to take the pit from Leslie. Ron's ex-wife" - what is the "pit"? It is not mentioned in the plot section.
- Reworded to be more clear. — Hun ter Ka hn 18:40, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Donna (Retta) insists to Leslie that the arrangement is a mistake because the two are crazy together." - "crazy together" - Is that a colloquialism?
- Reworded. — Hun ter Ka hn 18:40, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
'Offerman responded, "Yeah, that would be amazing." ' Not sure what this means in the context of the wikipedia article. It makes a little more sense in the news article because more context is given there than is lacking here.
- I just mean to convey that Offerman was very responsive to the idea. I've dropped the quote and paraphrased instead. — Hun ter Ka hn 18:40, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Offerman accidentally pulled a diner table out of the wall while Mullally laid on top of it." Do you mean "while Mullally was lying on top of it"? (Although I can't feature how she would be lying on top of a wall)
- I tried to make this more clear as well. — Hun ter Ka hn 18:40, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps it should be emphasized somewhere that the actors playing Ron and Tammy are real world husband and wife. I think it is only mentioned in the lead, and I had to spend some time figuring out who was married to whom amidst all the names, real and fictional.
- The first paragraph of the production section says, "Mullally is the real-life wife of Nick Offerman, who plays Ron Swanson in Parks and Recreation." Do you think I should reword the sentence to place more emphasis on it? Some specific wording suggestions would be helpful... — Hun ter Ka hn 18:40, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"in exchange for a 40 percent commission and Brandon" - I don't get the "and Brandon" part.
- That's a mistake, I'm not sure where it came from. Dropped it. — Hun ter Ka hn 18:40, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"2.2 rating/6 share" - what does the rating mean, a 6 percent share?
- Added wording to explain this. — Hun ter Ka hn 18:40, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Steve Heisler from The A.V. Club praised the episode and the performance of Swanson" - I had to do a search to find out who Swanson was. Most of the time you call him "Ron". I think you need to be consistent as there are already so many names and characters. And Swanson is the character's name, right? So he critic is praising the performance of a character? Am I misunderstanding?
- That should refer to Offerman, not Swanson. Fixed. — Hun ter Ka hn 18:40, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Xtzou (Talk) 16:12, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review! — Hun ter Ka hn 18:40, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Another nicely written piece. Xtzou (Talk) 19:03, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail: Pass!

Congradulations! Xtzou (Talk) 19:03, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]