Wikipedia:Peer review/Over There (Fringe)/archive1

Over There (Fringe)

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to nominate it soon for FA. It recently was promoted to GA status, and I have heavily expanded it to qualify for FA's criteria. It would be great if some users could look it over and raise any comments and/or concerns they might have with the article. Thanks, Ruby2010 talk 03:42, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Is anyone having any trouble understanding the plot? Being a Fringe viewer, I am aware of the episode's background, but other users might not be. Should I provide a brief background section (placed above the plot) to explain certain important plot items from earlier in the season? Thanks, Ruby2010 comment! 22:26, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by David Fuchs

The plot... yeah. Whenever you've got time-travel and/or alternate universes, it's difficult. The lead reads "The plotline follows Olivia (Anna Torv) and Walter (John Noble) as they lead a team of Cortexiphan subjects to the Other Side in order to retrieve Peter (Joshua Jackson), after discovering that he is unwittingly an integral part of the alternate Walter's plans to bring about the destruction of their universe using an ancient doomsday device." And kind of loses me, even though I know the basic gist of the plot. My basic thinking going into plot details is "throw at least one descriptor before the proper noun", in this case "FBI agents" or whatnot. "Cortexiphan"? "Other Side"? maybe "...to an alternate universe" here and explain "alternate universe, or "Other Side" in the plot?
- I can go line-by-line on the things I don't immediately understand in the plot, but it might be helpful if you take a stab at it first :) Learning experience!

I took a stab and provided a background section and tweaked the plot in the lead. :) Let me know what you think. Thanks! Ruby2010 comment! 18:39, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that a background section is necessary (it would lead to a lot of redundancy if you were trying to do all of the episodes, for example.) From what's currently in it, I think you just need to explain some of the stuff in-line of the plot section. I'll take what you have a do a test edit when I have time to show you what I mean. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 19:17, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've been looking at various FA articles on television episodes, and they don't seem to require intense explanations into each television show (examples: Lost's Confirmed Dead and The Simpsons' The Joy of Sect, to name but a few). On the other hand, should I model it more like No Rest for the Wicked (Supernatural)? Sorry about all the questions, I'm just getting nervous about the upcoming FA process, and want to be as prepared as possible. Also, I made a few tweaks with my article, but still left the background section until it is recommended I delete it. Thanks, Ruby2010 comment! 01:06, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the background section and added more about the premise to the lead. I think it looks pretty good, but let me know your thoughts. Thanks, Ruby2010 comment! 18:46, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More to follow. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 17:46, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Can you get a screenshot without the Fox logo? Surely the DVD doesn't have the watermark? Adabow (talk · contribs) 06:15, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'll see what I can scrounge up :) Ruby2010 comment! 15:21, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Found one. Better? Ruby2010 comment! 15:55, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nice. Adabow (talk · contribs) 19:39, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]