Talk:Home (The X-Files)/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Basilisk4u (talk · contribs) 17:36, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello, I will review this article! Cheers! Basilisk4u (talk) 17:36, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
Notes
[edit]- Lead
- The paragraphs look a little uneven on first glance, combine the last two paragraphs.
- "It premiered on the Fox network on October 11, 1996 in the United States and Canada on October 11, 1996 on the Fox Network, and subsequently aired in the United Kingdom." When did it air in the UK? The last part seems a bit odd.
- Plot
- After the first mention of "deformed baby", just refer to it as "the baby" unless you are specifically talking about the baby's deformations.
- Production
- "The duo had not watched anything from The X-Files' third season except for the episodes Morgan's brother Darin Morgan wrote, but after a survey on said season, decided to write a shocking story to 'start off with a bang'". What did this survey say? How did it influence the duo's writing? Explain this a little further.
- "The name Andy Taylor, as well as his deputy Barney, were references to the characters of the same name from The Andy Griffith Show. The Peacock house had earlier been used as the house of Harry Cokely in the season 2 episode 'Aubrey'." It seems a little bit like the second sentence is still talking about The Andy Griffith Show. Make sure these are separated a bit.
- "When Kim Manners read the script 'Home'..." Clarify who Kim Manners is. Also, I think it is better as "read the script for 'Home'"
- "Ten Thirteen Productions was asked to alter the audio..." Asked by who?
- "Re-recording Mixer David West was told by Standards and Practices that the kid couldn't make a sound, because of the horrifying adult imagery." This seems like it is missing quotation marks. Also, explain if they did finally alter the audio or not and why, because earlier, the article mentions that the baby was buried alive.
- I think this section would benefit from a photo being added. Maybe a picture of Charlie Chaplin?
- Reception
- I can't seem to find any problems :)
- References
- References 10-12 need publisher information
On hold
[edit]I have placed this article on hold for some concerns to be addressed. Good luck! Basilisk4u (talk) 22:35, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
- I believe I've got everything. What did you mean by "References 10-12 need publisher information" exactly? I went in to edit and it looks like they have publisher info to begin with. Other than that, I fixed and/or clarified everything else.--Gen. Quon (talk) 23:27, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
- Great! I am happy to pass the article. I went and added the publishers; it seems that the "work", which is the newspaper/magazine in the citation was put into the "publisher" section of the citation. Now the article is certainly good article quality. Great job. Basilisk4u (talk) 00:36, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
- OK, gotcha! Thank you for reviewing and passing. :)--Gen. Quon (talk) 04:20, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
- Great! I am happy to pass the article. I went and added the publishers; it seems that the "work", which is the newspaper/magazine in the citation was put into the "publisher" section of the citation. Now the article is certainly good article quality. Great job. Basilisk4u (talk) 00:36, 5 February 2012 (UTC)