Jump to content

Talk:Episode 14 (Twin Peaks)/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: Crisco 1492 (talk · contribs) 14:43, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Checklist

[edit]
Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Within definition
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. See note
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. Fine
7. Overall assessment. Pending

Comments

[edit]
1
3
  • Fix the CN tags (mostly direct quotes)
    Some of these direct quotes in the plot summary are from the episode itself; I've paraphrased some but left one or two shorter ones alone as there's no point citing the article's subject in an article about itself. GRAPPLE X 17:06, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
6
Source spotcheck
Based on this revision
  • FN2:
A: Checks out, no close paraphrasing
B: Checks out, no close paraphrasing
Question: What's the relevance of Pete Martell and Mr. Tojamura? This is nowhere in our plot summary.
  • FN7:
A: Checks out, obviously no close paraphrasing
B: Checks out, obviously no close paraphrasing
  • FN8
A: Checks out, no close paraphrasing
B: Checks out, no close paraphrasing
  • FN16
A: Checks out, no close paraphrasing
  • FN22
A: Checks out, no close paraphrasing
B: Checks out, no close paraphrasing
  • FN23
A: Checks out, no close paraphrasing
B: Checks out, no close paraphrasing

Further discussion

[edit]

Indonesian internet, what can I say? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:28, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]