Talk:Tucker McCall

Tucker McCall 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
August 24, 2013	Good article nominee	Listed

Television

	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.

Soap Operas

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soap Operas, an effort to build consistent guidelines for and improve articles about soap operas and telenovelas on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit WikiProject Soap Operas, where you can join the project and/or the discussion.Soap OperasWikipedia:WikiProject Soap OperasTemplate:WikiProject Soap Operassoap opera articles

Fictional characters

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters 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.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

File:Tucker-McCall-Y&R.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Tucker-McCall-Y&R.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:23, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

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

Reviewer: BrickHouse337 (talk · contribs) 01:52, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will begin this review once the GA review for Chloe Mitchell has concluded. Cheers, --Brick House 337 01:52, 23 August 2013 (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): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
One minor concern that I noticed: In the lead, it reads, "The character was slated to be a new businessman and billionaire, leading to speculation that Tucker would become a replacement character for icon Victor Newman (Eric Braeden), whose future with the series was in jeopardy at the time." It sort of sounds like Victor Newman's future was in jeopardy at the time, which is untrue, it was Eric Braeden's future who was in jeopardy. So maybe reword it to something like, "The character was slated to be a new businessman and billionaire, leading to speculation that Tucker would become a replacement character for icon Victor Newman (Eric Braeden), as Braeden's future with the series was in jeopardy at the time." No other concerns, everything looks good. Great job!
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):
Fairly well covered as far as focus.
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:
Overall, the article is in good article condition. I don't see any further issues holding it back. Sorry for the slight delay for the review. Pass. --Brick House 337 03:13, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks BrickHouse! Creativity97 03:21, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But plot summary very out-of-date! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.35.136.209 (talk) 21:49, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]