Talk:Smoke Gets in Your Eyes (Homicide: Life on the Street)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Smoke Gets in Your Eyes (Homicide: Life on the Street)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 14:35, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:39, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:39, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Prose is good, complies with MoS

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   References are RS, assume good faith for offline sources, no OR

   This scene, which was simultaneously praised for its humor and considered ridiculously far-fetched, was actually based on a real-life trick used by Baltimore Police Department detectives in 1988. Need attribution for who praised and criticized. Done

   • After looking back at the source, I decided to remove the clause in question altogether. It's a bit unclear in the book whether this is Kalat's opinion or that of critics at the time, plus on second glance I found it confusing what he means by it being considered "far-fetched" since it was based on real-life incidents. In any event, the clause doesn't add a whole lot to the article, so I found it easier to just remove it. — Hunter Kahn 00:16, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Are there no reviews of this episode to put in the Release and reception section? We have the ratings but no other reception information. Done

   • Unfortunately, and this was a problem with "And the Rockets' Dead Glare" as well, most of the articles about Homicide at the time this episode was aired were focused more on whether the show would be canceled, rather than on the individual episodes themselves. The good news is that this problem doesn't persist with the upcoming episodes "Night of the Dead Living" and "Bop Gun", but it did make it darn near impossible to find reviews for these particular episodes. I can take another look if you like, but I've scoured Lexis Nexis and Newsbank databases and I'm pretty sure there aren't any out there. — Hunter Kahn 00:16, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

   OK, fair enough. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:24, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   NPOV

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   Stable

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Licensed and captioned

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   On hold for seven days for the above issues to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:53, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

   • Thanks for your review! — Hunter Kahn 00:16, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

   Ok, I am happy to list this. Congratulations! Jezhotwells (talk) 00:24, 14 March 2011 (UTC)