Wikipedia:Peer review/Starved/archive1

Starved

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 believe that when the episode synopses are complete (something I plan to to do in the next week or so) the article will be at or near GA status. My biggest concern is with the production section. I think it's pretty decent but I'm afraid a reviewer might decide it's a little thin. I wanted feedback specifically on that aspect of the article as well as of course feedback on the article as a whole. Thanks, Otto4711 (talk) 19:12, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for June 2008.

Ruhrfisch comments: Very briefly, here are some suggestions for improvement. If you want more comments, please ask here.

A model article is often useful for ideas - I note Smallville (season 1) is an FA and may offer examples to follow.
The epsiode summary for the first one seems too long / overly detailed, while there are no summaries for the other episodes. This is my biggest concern for GA - comprehensiveness of the article. What else is there looks pretty good, well referenced.
I would provide context for the reader - for example, put the Nielsen ratings into perspective by explaining what they mean, and compare them to the ratings of the FX show that was kept by the network. How about the ratings for the other six episodes too to expand the reception section. See WP:PCR
It is not clear to me from the article how many episodes were originally ordered - 7 seems an odd number and I suspect it was more, but less were made when the plug was pulled. This needs to be made clearer

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). Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 11:14, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback. As always, it is appreciated. The episode summaries are complete. I'm continuing to work on trimming them but these episodes are pretty complexly plotted and are kind of defying shortening. I don't have a source on how many episodes were originally ordered but given that the concurrently-ordered It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia had a seven-episode first season it's reasonable to conclude that the order here was also for seven. I don't know of sources for the Nielsen ratings for the other episodes. Otto4711 (talk) 22:46, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I sometimes see Nielsen ratings in newspapers (print) but am not sure where to look for past ratings either. One summary vs the rest blank may have looked too long. Sounds like it was just a seven episode order - bad guess on my part. Take care, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 16:35, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! I found a source for the seven ep order! Damn, I'm good. ;-) Otto4711 (talk) 23:00, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]