Talk:The Werewolf Transformation

The Werewolf 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.
Review: June 8, 2015. (Reviewed version).

Television: Episode coverage

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.

Comedy

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Bentvfan54321 (talk · contribs) 23:44, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take this one, and will have my initial comments up as soon as I can. --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 23:44, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
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):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Sorry for the delay (well, at least I consider it a delay as I'm usually faster when it comes to these), I'll try to get it done tomorrow evening. --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 01:45, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Bilorv: Just a few minor issues here, and one slightly bigger, but probably resolvable, issue.

The lead uses "US" while the ratings section uses "U.S." I'd suggest using the same throughout the article.
Fixed. I've used "U.S." — it seems to be more common.
"Sheldon goes to get a haircut; his usual barber Mr. D'Onofrio is in a coma, so the barber's nephew Angelo is there instead." Do Mr.D'Onofrio or Angelo have actors that could be credited and linked in parentheses?
I've added (Peter Onorati) for Angelo, but Mr. D'Onofrio isn't credited in the episode and I can't actually find the actor's name at all.
"Vernee Watson-Johnson, who has appeared on several episodes of the show including the pilot, appeared briefly in the episode as Mr. Donofrio's nurse." Shouldn't this be "D'Onofrio"?
Yes, it should. Fixed.
According to this, Ref 8 is dead while Ref 9 is a redirect link.
I absolutely hate BARB's website. I've fixed the link and added a few instructions of how to find the figures. Unfortunately, there's no unique URL for the page showing the relevant data and I can't archive the link because Wayback Machine doesn't have a page archived for 23-29 April 2012 and won't let you search for the right week.

For ref 9, I don't see a problem. The URL in the reference is identical to the URL I get taken to when I click the link. Does the URL appear different to you? Or is the tool just being weird?
For me at least, the link used in the article is this... http://uk.ign.com/articles/2012/02/24/the-big-bang-theory-the-werewolf-transformation-review

…while the link redirects to this: http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/02/24/the-big-bang-theory-the-werewolf-transformation-review

The tool was highlighting green, as the link uses "uk.ign.com", which redirects to "www.ign.com". It's not a major issue; my guess is that it's probably fine for you and not for me since you live in England and I live in America. --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 12:52, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The image is the biggest problem here. This dispute needs to be fixed before the article can be promoted.
Yeah, the image should be deleted today. I've removed it from the article in advance. I hope this isn't a problem — GA #6 says "The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement". However, I could, if you wanted, add a picture of Jim Parsons to the production section.
An image of Parsons (or any relevant cast or production member) would be great, but not absolutely necessary. --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 12:52, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

--Bentvfan54321 (talk) 01:33, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I think I've addressed everything. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 11:16, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Bilorv: It looks like you have! I'll promote the article shortly (feel free to add an image to the production section at your discretion). I also see you've signed up for the GA Cup. If you want to wait until it starts to review articles, I completely understand; when you do, I currently have the four oldest Television nominations and five of the oldest six. No sweat if you're busy or want to do other things, but I remember you reviewed The American Bible Challenge, The Chase (U.S. game show) and Minute to Win It (U.S. game show). Since you know what to look for in the game show articles, if you could review even one of them, that would be great. Thanks, --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 12:52, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on The Werewolf 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) 01:43, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]