Jump to content

Talk:Vicious (TV series)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Vicious (TV series)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: BenLinus1214 (talk · contribs) 22:37, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I will be reviewing this for GAN. Give me a couple hours to read this. BenLinus1214talk 22:37, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I will have to fail this article for now. Basically, the problem is that the article is not very informative or broad enough. Extremely far from a GA in that regard, especially because there are no production notes whatsoever and the episode mostly consists of an episode list. BenLinus1214talk 01:16, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    There's not really much prose here, so you need to change that.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
    Your larger numbers of mixed to negative reviews is a bit troubling
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. 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):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

@CB2288: If you would like to further improve the article, here are some comments:

  • The article does not have a wide enough scope. There are no production details, and the series overview and reception sections are much too short.
  • A lot of your references boil down to database entries, which shouldn't be over-cited in an article, as they do not illustrate notability.
  • Your page mostly consists of an episode list, which isn't really great for a GA. If you think about it, if you remove the episode list, the article is pretty much nothing. I'm not suggesting that you remove it--just pointing that out.
  • Lead
  • Series overview
    • Needs expansion.
  • Cast and characters
    • Unsourced.
    • Should probably expand into prose. See Veronica Mars for example.
  • Episodes
  • Reception
    • No source on Rotten Tomatoes
    • Your reviews don't seem to cover an 80% positive review rate.
  • DVD Release
    • Unsourced