This 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.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
"The official website for The X-Files notes that the episode's plot is similar to mythology surrounding the Aztec agriculture god Xipe Totec". Don't think the official website needs to be noted.
No mention of how many directing credits. Was it the directors first credit, etc.? Thanks!
Is that really important? It's, like, his 53rd or something. Not really a special number.--Gen. Quon(Talk) 04:42, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Executive producer John Shiban later explained that, since Doggett and Reyes were in control of The X-Files, the producers needed to give one of them a drive." citation/reference needed
It's the citation after the sentence, "The Truth About Season 9". Cites don't have to always come after a sentence. You can bundle them at the end.--Gen. Quon(Talk) 04:42, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"The official website for The X-Files notes that the episode's plot is similar to mythology surrounding the Aztec agriculture god Xipe Totec". Don't think the official website needs to be noted.
"Hellbound" originally aired in the United States on the Fox network on January 27, 2002 and in the United Kingdom on BBC One on January 5, 2003" Re-write to: "Hellbound" originally aired on the Fox network on January 27, 2002, and was first broadcast in the United Kingdom on BBC One on January 5, 2003"
The episode received a Nielsen household rating of 5.1, meaning that it was seen by 5.1% of the nation's estimated households. Then entry was viewed by 5.4 million households and by 7.8 million viewers. It was the 71st most watched episode of television that aired during the week ending January 27". Rewrite to: The episode's initial broadcast was viewed by approximately 5.4 million households, and 7.7 million viewers, making it the seventh-first most watched episode of television that aired during the week ending January 27. "Hellbound" earned a Nielsen household rating of 5.1, meaning that it was seen by 5.1% of the nation's estimated households
"Jessica Morgan from Television Without Pity gave the episode a B grade" anything else?
No, those reviews are usually just recaps.--Gen. Quon(Talk) 04:42, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
John Keegan who is that. What critic, etc. Another thing, you jump from one review to another. Very confusing
He's the Critical Myth guy. I'm not sure how to make them less un-jumpy. They're written like all the other articles that have passed, and they read fine to me.--Gen. Quon(Talk) 04:42, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There should be ref. for each sentence for critic reviews
I'm not so sure. Usually, I put a ref after a direct quote or the end of a reference. You don't have to have a ref at the end of every sentence, per Wikipedia:Citation overkill
Ref. 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, 14: All should be linked to the book source below as in Squeeze (The X-Files)
I wouldn't say this is necessary. GA doesn't require perfect sourcing methodology, and my notes should be fine enough to pass. Granted, if this was up for FAR, I'd agree, but it isn't, yet.--Gen. Quon(Talk) 04:42, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ref. 5: Season 9, and 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment should be unlinked as it already is above
"Hellbound" on The X-Files Wiki, an external wiki. The X-Files shouldn't be italic, as this is for the wiki, not show, and there website isn't in italics like that
The X-Files is the name of the show; the title is referring to the show, as it is a wikia about the show.--Gen. Quon(Talk) 04:42, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see why this needs to change. It's been like that on the "Squeeze" page since before it was an FA, meaning that it was not the FAR that suggested the change. I feel this is just a stylistic difference, and for the sake of continuity, I'd like to keep it.--Gen. Quon(Talk) 04:42, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine.
That's all. Good work! TBrandley 04:05, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've done most of your suggestions, although I've disagreed with a handful (and noted my rationale) of them. Other than that, I've fixed it up. Thanks for the review.--Gen. Quon(Talk) 04:42, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. All of which you haven't addressed are fine. Again, good work! This will be a quick pass. TBrandley 04:48, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
