Template:Did you know nominations/The Bitch Is Back (Veronica Mars)

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Zanhe (talk) 18:00, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

The Bitch Is Back (Veronica Mars)

(

)

... that in promos for the series finale of Veronica Mars, The CW billed it as a season finale, despite the fact that the series had already been cancelled?

ALT1:... that in writing the series finale of Veronica Mars, series creator Rob Thomas wanted to create an ambiguous ending to keep the viewers guessing?
Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Miriam Adams

Improved to Good Article status by Johanna (talk). Self-nominated at 17:07, 14 March 2016 (UTC).

New enough (promoted to GA-class on 11 March 2016, diff), long enough, All non-lead and non-plot paragraphs have inline citations, copyvio checks reveal no problems (e.g. [1]). Matters that need to be addressed and concerns are:

~~QPQ still needs to be performed~~ (done.) North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:49, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
The sources used in the article to verify the hook (source) and Alt (source) do not appear to be particularly reliable. PopSugar seems to primarily be a platform to promote brands (see Bloomberg profile). Give Me My Remote is essentially a blog. Are there any other sources available that are more reliable per Wikipedia's standards? North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:37, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

@Northamerica1000: Thanks for the review. The QPQ has been supplied, and I have changed sources (in the case of the main hook) and slightly tweaked ALT1 to fit a different source (DVD commentary). Let me know what you think! Johanna^{(talk to me!)} 02:39, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

@Johanna: Hook content is now verified with an inline citation to a reliable source in the article ([2]), but the source does not state anything about The CW billing it as such, and does not state anything about advertising or promotions. I'm not seeing where content of the alt is cited in the article. E.g. it states, "... his intention was to keep viewers guessing and prevent the conclusion from being too bland or typical", but no inline citation is present at the end of the sentence. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:12, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

@Northamerica1000: Sorry about that. When I searched for a better source, I found a PopMatters article published on the same day as the first one, and I assumed it was the same one. It has been changed. Also, I have added a direct inline citation to that sentence for ALT1. Johanna^{(talk to me!)} 15:23, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Both hook and alt are now properly verified in the article. I prefer the initial hook, which is backed by a secondary source ([3]), whereas the alt is backed by a primary source, the liner notes from the Veronica Mars: The Complete Third Season DVD. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:58, 12 April 2016 (UTC)