Talk:Star Trek: Phase II/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: MWright96 (talk · contribs) 14:48, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
Reviewing this article. MWright96 (talk) 14:48, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): (OR):
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No edit wars, etc.:
- 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):
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate
use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
Background
[edit]- "Afterwards it saw success in broadcast syndication," - Afterward
- "Kaufman claimed that Paramount attributed this to the idea that science fiction fans wouldn't go see two films released so close together." - would not
Conception
[edit]- "At the time, TOS was being broadcast on 137 stations in the United States in syndication," - I think TOS should be spelt out for consistency
- The "s" in "radicalisation" should be a "z"
Crew and production design
[edit]- "He described his concerns saying that he didn't want to" - did not
Cancellation
[edit]- Delink NBC as it already link in the background sub-section
References
[edit]- No dead links
Not too many problems I found. On hold until issues are dealt with. MWright96 (talk) 18:57, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
- @MWright96: Thanks - I've address all those issues. Thank you for doing the review. Miyagawa (talk) 19:27, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Miyagawa: Can now pass this article. MWright96 (talk) 19:45, 4 August 2016 (UTC)