Wikipedia:Peer review/Modern Family (season 1)/archive3
| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I hope it can reach good article status or featured list. Please tell me which choice would be the best choice
Thanks, NoD'ohnuts (talk) 16:03, 1 May 2011 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts
Ruhrfisch comments: I have seen this show a few times and enjoyed it - thanks for your work on this article. Here are some suggestions for improvement.
- I looked and there are GAs, FAs and FLs about seasons of television shows. My personal preference is to go GA / FA, but it is your call. Parks and Recreation (season 1) is a fairly recent FA that might be a good model article for ideas and examples to follow.
- There is a toolbox on this PR page which finds two disambiguation links (click "disambig links")
- The last sentence of paragraph two of the lead seems like it does not fit there - seems like a better fit at the end of the lead's first paragraph to me.
- The episode summaries are a bit short compared to the Parks and Rec summaries (on my monitor P&R are all three lines long or one just over 3 lines, these are often only 1 line long.
- I also like how Parks and Rec's summaries give the names of actors on first mention of the character
- These summaries are written from an in-universe point of view and need to be written so as to better explain things to someone who is not familiar with the series. For example, although I know who Manny is (and he is mentioned in the lead), who is Luke? So "Manny and Luke get into a fight a school" makes no sense to me even though I have seen several episodes. Reading further, it seems he is Claire's son, so explain that somehow. See WP:IN-U and WP:PCR
- One more example - I have not seen the episode "Hawaii" but I would imagine that some of them go there on vacation. It is not clear which of the three families do go there from the summary. Probably should also make it clearer that there are two related episodes (I had to read the article on the Hawaii episode to make sure)
- The prose is still kind of rough. For example the first sentence of Conception begins While working in the office Lloyd and Levitan were telling stories about their family and they thought that could be a show idea, and started working around the idea of a families being observed in a mockumentary style show. This made me assume that Lloyd and Levitan had one family together and were life partners as well as business partners. Then I looked at their articles here and they each have a spouse and family. Then I read the first peer review and this very point was raised there.
- I also worry because this starts without much background. Lloyd and Levitan have both been involved in some pretty well known and popular shows and it might be useful to give a few sentences of background on them.
- As I said I have only seen the show a few times - is it really a mockumentary? I did not recall that (it is also late and I am tired)
- The WP:MOS says to use someone's full name the first time you mention them and then use just their last name after that. I think it is OK to use full name for the first time in the lead and the first time in the body of the article. Here though, Conception refers to Lloyd and Levitan and then Crew spells out their full names again. If more than one person has the same last name, then using the full name throughout id fine to avoid confusion.
- WP:OVERLINK also says to link on first mention in the lead, and it is OK to also link on first mention in the body of the article. The above example also violates this. Or Julie Bowen is linked twice in just the Cast section.
- Sentences on directors in Crew needs a ref or two. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and at least the end of every paragraph needs a ref.
- Some refs are incomplete. For example current ref 31 is just "From Variety (May 8, 2009)" with a link to http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118003355?refCatId=14 but the link shows this has a title and an author and the date is incorrect (it is May 7, 2009 on the Variety page). Internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. {{cite web}} and other cite templates may be helpful. See WP:CITE and WP:V {{Cite news}} could work here too, since Variety is a trade paper.
- Avoid words like "currently" and vague time terms as they can quickly become outdated. So The season is currently nominated for Outstanding Directing for a Comedy Series for series co-creator Steven Levitan's work on the penultimate episode, "Hawaii".[79] would be better by giving the date (year? month and year?) of the nomination. Then I would update this once the award is given (the award it is nominated for is not clear either - the ref is for the DGA, but when you click on the ref it mentions that the show won for the episode Halloween, not Hawaii. Something weird is goin on here.
- Any free pictures of any of the major cast or creators or directors or writers to use here?
- SOrry this took so long to review. I think it is close to GA once these points are addressed.
- Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)
Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:17, 13 May 2011 (UTC)