Talk:We Interrupt This Program/GA1

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Some Dude From North Carolina (talk · contribs) 14:52, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I'm going to be reviewing this article. Expect comments by the end of the week. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 14:52, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"working out or training, or spending time with a dog" – double "or" so rephrase
Remove the comma after "supporting roles in the MCU films".
Remove the comma after "some welcome backstory" (see RT consensus).
Remove the commas after "fan theories about the series" and "Park and Dennings".
There are a few more reviews at RT. Try adding them with WP:RECEPTION.
Mark references from The New York Times with "|url-access=limited".
Mark references from Vulture with "|url-access=limited".
The Wrap → TheWrap (for consistency throughout Wikipedia)
Be consistent with Comicbook.com or ComicBook.com.
Be consistent with Art of VFX or The Art of VFX.
Wikilink Dave Itzkoff, Justin Warner. and Megan McDonnell in the citations they are credited in.
Ping when done. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 16:16, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- @Some Dude From North Carolina: I've addressed all of these outside the additional reviews, since the hope was to try and be consistent across all the episode articles with the publications presented in the reviews section. I'm not seeing too many others to add in, and will see if Adamstom.97 or others have any thoughts regarding this. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:34, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - I have added a couple small bits and done a re-arrange. @Some Dude From North Carolina: we now have all the RT "Top Critics" for the episode and what I think is a good spread of other reviews, plus a more logical grouping for the paragraphs. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:27, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed