Talk:The Reporter (Parks and Recreation)/GA1

GA Review

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

Good article nomination on hold

This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of July 20, 2009, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Could use a bit more summary of the Reception subsection in the WP:LEAD, possibly with one or two excerpted quotes from the reviews.

2. Factually accurate?: Duly cited throughout.

3. Broad in coverage?: Reception section seems to have a good deal of cites to web-based critique sources, but only one newspaper review. Would it be possible to find a couple other reviews in printed media?

4. Neutral point of view?: Neutrally presented and written in matter of fact tone.

5. Article stability? No issues upon review of article's edit history and talk page history.

6. Images?:

File:Parks and recreation the reporter.jpg = fair use image, image page looks good.
File:Amy poehler alison becker.JPG = free use image, image should be moved to Wikimedia Commons.

Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far.— Cirt (talk) 01:56, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the uploaded to Wikimedia Commons and set the other one up for speedy deletion. I also added a bit from Reception to the lead, but not much so I would remain mostly consistent with the other articles; if that works let me know, and if not I'll add more or change it. As far as the Reception section, I really couldn't find much from printed media; as you probably realize, the third episode of a new series is when the attention starts to drop a bit, then it picks up near the end. However, the sources used now have been used as acceptable sources in other The Office and Parks and Recreation articles, as well as other shows. We could drop Cinema Blend or TV Squad if you like. Let me know what you think, and if the Reception section is really just unacceptable, I'll try harder for printed sources... — Hunter Kahn _(c) 13:11, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, don't drop any sources. Keep me posted on trying to find more - I will also attempt to do some research and searching. Cirt (talk) 15:57, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added one print source, but I'm confident I can find more. I'll keep looking... — Hunter Kahn _(c) 15:09, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's been a month since the last comment. Are the concerns addressed/in progress, or should this have been failed a while back? Wizardman 18:17, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Passed

Looks better, in response to above. Passed. Cirt (talk) 18:18, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]