Talk:There's Got to Be a Morning After Pill/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 14:05, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, running through a review now. I've run the dash tool and fixed one duplicate link.

Image licence is good.

Lead: I like the inclusion of the series summary in the first paragraph rather than the second as it helps balance the size of the three. I might have to borrow that idea for my Star Trek articles.

Yeah, it was indirectly suggested by a reviewer who thought that I should make my first paragraphs longer.

Production: You repeat "marking" in the same context twice in successive sentences. Can you re-write one to stop it coming off as repetitive?

Done changed the structure of the second appearance. Johanna^{(talk to me!)} 22:08, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews: "great" needs a direct citation.
"Like last week's episode, 'There's Got to Be a Morning After Pill' benefited from integrating already established characters into a mystery of the week." needs a direct citation.
"jam-packed with drama" needs a direct citation.
"one of the weakest that the show has ever done." needs a direct citation.
Television Without Pity is in italics in the cite, but not in the body of the article.

Done with all. Johanna^{(talk to me!)} 22:08, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Once those issues are corrected, I think this article will be good to go for GA. Miyagawa (talk) 14:05, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Miyagawa: I believe that I have responded to all comments and concerns. I don't know if you have any GANs, but if you do, I would be happy to review one (or more). If you could respond on my FL, that would be great as well. Johanna^{(talk to me!)} 22:08, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Great, happy to promote. Miyagawa (talk) 22:12, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]