Wikipedia:Peer review/Ambush (ER)/archive1

Ambush (ER)

This is the first time ever writing a television article so I would like to know what else to do to make it a Good Article. As well, anything that could possibly help with plans to make it Featured afterwards. I will take feedback for both. GamerPro64 00:49, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Aoba47

• While this image is nice, I am not sure if it is beneficial enough to just having something that cut across section titles. While this being Kingston's first episode is somewhat notable, it is not notable enough for an image imo since this is not discussed in terms of production and reception aside from a single sentence saying that was her first appearance.
• I would be mindful about the amount of times that the word "episode" is used in the lead.
• I am not sure that the fact this episode received received more ratings than Seinfeld and Veronica's Closet is particularly notable for the lead. It is great information for the article, but it seems more like a detail while the lead should provide an overview of the subject.
• I'd avoid repeating "watched" in this sentence: Watched in a total of 42.71 million viewers, the episode became the most watched season premiere episode for a drama series.
• In the lead, I would specifying which Primetime Emmy Awards that was awarded to this episode as it is notable.
• I'd highly encourage you to archive your web links to avoid future headache with link rot and death. I would not link the Newspapers.com sources though as it is unnecessary imo.
• Could you explain why Citation 5 is structured different than the other Newspapers.com sources? I would also put in clippings for the other Newspapers.com citations so it meets accessibility guidelines since the source can be made more accessible to readers.
• I'd avoid putting items in all caps like in Citation 7 even if the original publication does this.
• Remember to mark citations that go to a publication which requires a subscription to view. Citation 7 is a good example of this as you need a subscription to view The New York Times after hitting the quota of free articles.
• The Associated Press should not be presented as the author as that is not really true. I would present them with the agency= parameter. The author is a staff member from the Associated Press, but not the entire organization itself.
• The citations seem a little thin for this article. That is not necessarily a bad thing as this could just be representative of the coverage out there, but have you tried looking for book or academic citations? There is this article that is entirely about the episode, but I recommend checking out the legitimacy and quality of the journal. This article also touches on the episode as well as this one. I think it would be worth looking through Google Scholar.
• Leading off the above question, have you tried looking for sources on the databases provided by the Wikipedia Library? That may be helpful.
• Just so you are aware according to MOS:TVPLOT, the episode summary can have up to 400 words. From my current assessment, the current episode summary has only 148 words so you can add more detail if you would like as that may be helpful to readers.
• I would add something about how this episode was released (i.e. DVD, streaming, etc.). I usually combine this information with the ratings to form a "Broadcast history and release" section.
• The airdate should be mentioned in the article and supported with a citation. It is currently only brought up in the lead and infobox.
• The Gold Derby citation credits Joyce Eng as the writer.

I hope that this review is helpful. I honestly love reading Wikipedia articles about television shows. I used to work on them quite a bit, but it has been a long time since I've gone back to one. I really need to do that again because I get so much enjoyment out it. Apologies for the amount of comments, and I hope that this will encourage other reviewers to participate in this peer review. Aoba47 (talk) 01:07, 24 April 2022 (UTC)