Jump to content

Talk:Plan and Execution

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Legobot (talk | contribs) at 13:04, 9 September 2022 (Bot: Setting |oldid= for {{GA}}). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
WikiProject iconTelevision: Episode coverage GA‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.
GAThis article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.
WikiProject iconUnited States GA‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
GAThis article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Plan and Execution/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sammi Brie (talk · contribs) 20:08, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA review
(see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):
    b (citations to reliable sources):
    c (OR):
    d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):
    b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
    b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

Overall:
Pass/Fail:

· · ·


Minor copy changes are all that's needed besides a few other tweaks. 7-day hold to FishandChipper. Sammi Brie (she/her • tc) 20:23, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@A person in Georgia: I see you've made all the changes. Two last tasks: running IABot again and (I suggest this across the various BCS articles you have) adding alt text to the promo poster. Sammi Brie (she/her • tc) 04:37, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Sammi Brie:  Done A person in Georgia (talk) 12:45, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copy changes

Lead

  • "Plan and Execution" was met with critical acclaim, particularly for its direction, cinematography, score, and on-screen performances, most notably that of Patrick Fabian as Howard. I feel like this sentence just has too many commas. Maybe removing ", particularly" would help?

Plot

Production

Reception

Other items

  • Images: The Fabian image is freely licensed; the poster has an appropriate NFUR. I would suggest writing alt text for the poster by using |image_alt= in the infobox, as the caption alone does not describe the poster.
  • Run IABot again (looks like the newest ref was added after archiving). The Rolling Stone coverage is culture, not politics. There is a tweet, which is used as a primary source for a statement by Schnauz.
  • Earwig flags quotes, quoted reviews, and coincidental formulations ("Better Call Saul and Breaking Bad"). No substantial issues.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.