Wikipedia:WikiProject Television/Grey's Anatomy task force/A-Class review/Log
This is a log of A-Class reviews from WikiProject Grey's Anatomy.
- The following is an archived discussion of an A-Class nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in the main page's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was approved by TBrandley 05:06, 1 November 2012 (UTC) [1].[reply]
- Nominator(s): TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 14:33, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for A-Class because while I understand some may feel it is too early for FA status, I believe this fully satisfies the criteria for A-Class. Thanks, TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 14:33, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Support It is a great article - well written, containing all the available relevant info, with free images. Its quality has already been established after the Good Article Review. And while I myself believe it is too early for Featured Article Candidacy, it fully satisfies the criteria for A-Class. Jonathan Harol*d Koszeghi (talk) 11:48, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Support I agree with Jonathan; it's a good article with no apparent issues. --Sofffie7 (talk) 12:43, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 04:49, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments
TBrandley 16:06, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
|
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following is an archived discussion of an A-Class nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in the main page's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was not approved by TRLIJC19 13:11, 1 November 2012 (UTC) [2].[reply]
- Nominator(s): Jonathan Harold Koszeghi (talk) 11:38, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for A-Class because I believe that it fully satisfies the criteria for A-Class. Thanks, Jonathan Harold Koszeghi (talk) 11:38, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Lead: I suggest you move the sentence about the Washington's non-appearance next to the guest stars at the beginning as it lists the actors that appeared in the episode so the line on Washington would better fit there, IMO. I know it changes the lines' adjustements but I feel it would be more logical. If you do make the change then you'll have to link Washington there and unlink him under.
* Plot question: You say Mark seeks reconciliation with Derek. Did he succeed? Did they reconcile? If not then maybe it could be briefly mentioned ;)
- Reception: Capitalize the 'S' of BuzzSugar
- Issues in the references:
- Ref. 1: Replace ABC with American Broadcasting Company and link it since it's mentioned for the first time. Oh and why is the title of the episode bolded? (just askin')
- Ref. 5: Link People and add the publisher, which is Time Inc
- Ref. 6: Publisher=Time Inc
- Ref. 8: Jezebel.com -> Jezebel; add the publisher (Gawker Media) and link it
- Ref. 9: the work is E! Online, the publisher is NBCUniversal
- Ref. 11: Lowercase the 'P' of Starpulse
- Ref. 12: The Washington Post is the work (don't forget the 'The'); add the publisher (The Washington Post Company) and link it
- Ref. 15: unlink Time Inc
- Ref. 18: link TNYT and TNYTC
- Ref. 19: ABC.com -> American Broadcasting Company
- Ref. 23: ABC.com -> American Broadcasting Company
- Ref. 24: Just keep BuddyTV as publisher (to have it also in 'work' is redundant) and link it
- Ref. 25: Link Entertainment Weekly; add the publisher (Time Inc), the author and the date
- Ref. 26: Keep TVGuide as 'work' only and link it
- Ref. 28: Capitalize the 'S' of BuzzSugar; publisher=Sugar, Inc
- Ref. 29: Link IGN and News Corporation
--Sofffie7 (talk) 12:34, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Coordinator note – This article will need spotchecks to check for plagiarism and verifiability, because Jonathan has never had them done for one of his articles. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 00:44, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll try to give this a spotcheck later, unless someone beats me to it. TBrandley 03:35, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.