Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Without (The X-Files)/1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Without (The X-Files)[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review
Result: Delist. Unreliably sourced. Geometry guy 23:10, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how this article passed GA the first time around. Since I've recently had a somewhat contentious GA review with another X-files episode article (which was also written by the creator of this article), I think it would be best to leave this as a community review. Below are my problems with this article:

  • Article is poorly sourced. Sheer quantity of sources is quite low for a GA, and the quality of the sources is also not good. The 5 references for this article are:
    • A booklet about the season by Fox Home Entertainment (WP:SELFPUB).
    • The DVD of the episode itself (WP:SELFPUB).
    • Nielsen ratings from an X-files fan site (xfiles.host.sk).
    • A listing of international air dates for the episode, also from a fan site (geos.tv).
    • Ratings information from what appears to be a British satellite TV provider. Note that the reference link doesn't point to the information (because the web site doesn't allow such a link), but instead includes instructions for how to navigate through their site to the relevant information.
  • Typical TV episode GA articles are much more comprehensive than this article. The reception section is only a few sentences long. There is no cast section, or even a link to an X-files cast article. The plot and production sections are short and not comprehensive, and both sections are only referenced from a self-published source. The introduction is completely unreferenced. SnottyWong talk 15:47, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I, too, am concerned that so much of the article sources from a DVD compilation and self-published collateral. Majoreditor (talk) 04:51, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist, mainly since none of these concerns were worked on in the past month. Wizardman Help review good articles 17:16, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I know this is a million years old and its already been bumped back up to GA, but a booklet released along with a DVD, as well as a bonus feature doesn't qualify as SELFPUB, because it has been released by a legitimate source.--Gen. Quon (talk) 01:53, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment/Without_(The_X-Files)/1&oldid=491504640"