Talk:The Transformation

The Transformation 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 13, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed

Science Fiction Low‑importance

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction 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.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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.

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Grapple X (talk · contribs) 02:53, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Finally, one I've seen (first one I saw, actually).

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:
B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
"On an airplane en route" -> "en route" seems odd without a locaiton either specified or implied ("en route to Belfast" or "no, I'm not there yet; I'm en route"); try "in flight". The same applies to the second use in the "analysis" section.
" The Fringe team arrives on the scene and discover the beast's body, and Dr. Walter Bishop (John Noble) concludes that it started out as a human; Olivia Dunham (Anna Torv) recognizes Bowman's picture from John Scott's (Mark Valley) memories, realizing that Bowman was flying to meet another man in the memories named Daniel Hicks (Felix Solis)." This one's pretty lengthy. Split it into three sentences; one at "Dr. Walter..." and another at "Olivia".
"with some kind of "designer virus"" -> switch "some kind of" to just "a".
"Being filtered details from a secret radio by Hicks" -> "filtered" doesn't work here. "Fed" or "given" maybe.
"Up the point "The Transformation" aired," -> "Up the point" I assume should be "Up to the point", but this leaves the sentence reading like something's missing. If it's Jackson's favourite up to the point where it aired, did it stop being his favourite after it aired?
"the Olivia-John Scott storyline" -> should be an en dash rather than a hyphen here.
"He consequently graded the episode an A-" -> paste a minus sign from minus in there instead of a hyphen; makes it a little more visible at a glance.
Mostly addressed the above. For Jackson's "favorite" line, here's what Popular Mechanics wrote, "[Jackson] thinks last week's transformation episode is the best episode they've done so far..." I've reworded it to "best" instead of "favorite", but without directly giving another episode that he now finds best, I don't think there's anything else to add here. Ruby 2010/2013 15:44, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. I've reworded "up to the point" to "at the time"; the former implies that the subject ceased or changed, rather than what we have which is a case of information potentially having changed without any confirmation it has. If that makes sense. It probably doesn't. GRAPPLE X 16:06, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Just wondering why "Sarah Clarke Stewart" is listed as "Clarke Stewart, Sarah" while "Charlie Jane Anders" is "Anders, Charlie Jane"; both seem like fore-middle-family names and should probably be done in the latter manner.

Done! Ruby 2010/2013 15:44, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Looks good.
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Seems grand.
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Recent flurry of activity but nothing unstable or controversial.
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Seems alright. A screenshot showing the use of the monster dentures might be more relevant but the spines are also mentioned so that's fine. Wondering why the Wells image is only PD in Canada; might be a good idea to use one which is PD US too (servers are in Florida so US copyright law is generally the one to aim for), the lead image in H. G. Wells is a good substitute (though slightly less grandiose-looking).

It was difficult to find a suitable image for the monster because the episode shows a gradual transformation; the director (perhaps understandably) didn't give a close shot of him, and consequently there weren't really any good shots of his teeth. I've switched out the Wells image with the one used in his infobox. Ruby 2010/2013 15:44, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Overall:
Pass or Fail:
Not take you long sorting this one out. Never did quite get why you seemed to skip out the first season though. GRAPPLE X 14:12, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, as always, for the review. Yeah, I think I moved onto the later seasons because I preferred them, particularly anything to do with the parallel universe. I'm trying to make amends though! There's more production info out there than I thought, so bringing the first season to GA status shouldn't be too difficult. "The Transformation" is one of my favorites of the first season, if only because of that shocking opening scene. Interesting that it was the first one you saw. How far are you into the series now? Ruby 2010/2013 15:44, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Still just seen season one, paying for a holiday the missus booked on a whim has left me a little broke. :( Can't figure out where I left the DVD though cause I've been wanting to rewatch it (same thing happened with my Twin Peaks set, had to rebuy it just to write the season one articles. I think I live with a tumblebeast.). Passing this one now, having made the change listed above. GRAPPLE X 16:06, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I "lost" my copy for a while too (brother took it). Have fun on holiday! Hopefully it's somewhere interesting. Ruby 2010/2013 16:25, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on The Transformation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:01, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Transformation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110301081000/http://www.fox.com/fringe/recaps/season-1/episode-13 to http://www.fox.com/fringe/recaps/season-1/episode-13/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:19, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]