Talk:Long, Long Time (The Last of Us)/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: NegativeMP1 (talk · contribs) 19:40, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

I guess you could say this nomination was waiting a long, long time. I'll take a look at this one soon. λ NegativeMP1 19:40, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

General criteria

Checking the criteria listed at WP:GAFAIL:

• Article seems to be close to meeting the criteria at first glance.
• No copyright violations seem to be present.
• No cleanup banners or tags present.
• No edit warring, in-fact the article has been mostly stagnant for a while.
• No previous GA review to take into account.

I'll get to reviewing the prose and spot-checking references shortly. λ NegativeMP1 18:15, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

That was a lie, whoops. Anyways, here you go.

Review

Prose

Near nothing wrong with this.

• "Mazin's script was published by Deadline in May 2023, considered one of the ten drama series most likely for an Emmy nomination." Latter part doesn't make any sense.
• "Critics overwhelmingly considered the episode the season's best,[5][62][63] and some named it among the greatest television episodes;[64][65][66] The Hollywood Reporter's Daniel Fienberg felt it elevated the series to a new level,[4] Empire's John Nugent called it "moving, surprisingly romantic, and one of the finest hours of television in recent memory",[67] and The Guardian's Andy Welch described it as "absolutely magical television"." This sentence should be broken up, probably after the outlets saying it was among the greatest television episodes.

Images

• Consider adding alt text to all of the images.
• The only not-public domain image in use here is the infobox image, which seems to be justified as a point of discussion in the article.

Sources

• Spotchecked some uses of 17, 30, 39, 2, 20, as well as 64, 65, 66, 91, and 96. Particularly focused on the reception bits due to the "among the greatest television" and a review bombing definitely being areas that need high quality sourcing.
  • 65 and 66 only describe the episode as being one of the best in recent years. Maybe have attribution here (ex. X and Y named it among the greatest television episodes in recent years, while Z named it one of the greatest of all time.)

There isn't really a whole lot that needs to be addressed, overall an extremely well written article and probably one of the greatest I've read related to TV episodes. I'll put this on hold for now. λ NegativeMP1 19:06, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

@NegativeMP1: Thanks for the review and kinds words! I've gone through and addressed your concerns—please let me know if there's anything else. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 09:20, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Alright, looks good to me. Passing this, good job. λ NegativeMP1 17:09, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.