Talk:Immortality (Fringe)

Immortality (Fringe) has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Immortality (Fringe) is part of the Fringe (season 3) series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 30, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed
July 26, 2012	Good topic candidate	Promoted

Current status: Good article

Television: Episode coverage

	Television portal 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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.

Science Fiction Low‑importance

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Immortality (Fringe)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Grapple X (talk · contribs) 01:52, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Saw this, reminded me I probably owe you a review. Also Joan Chen is the worst thing about Twin Peaks by far. :(

That's funny, because I never watched Twin Peaks (too young), and only heard about the TP references from online critics. I assumed Chen was a major part of the show, but now it sounds like she was TP's Kate. ;) Loved the link by the way. Ruby 2010/2013 04:20, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:
I'm not sure it's worth noting Twin Peaks in the lead, as there seem to be more references to The Beatles/Charlie Manson in there. I'd also wonder about the phrasing of "two references" to Peaks—really it seems like one reference which stems from Chen's appearance. Maybe phrase it as "Guest star Joan Chen had previously appeared in the television series Twin Peaks. When one of the episode's victims orders "a piece of cherry pie", critics picked up on this as a reference to Twin Peaks lead character Dale Cooper's fondness for the dish". Maybe word it a little better than that, I'm not sure.
"The storyline with the Dr. Silva and his beetles" -> if this is a mistake in the source ("the Dr. Silva"?), then mark it with {{sic}} for clarity.

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Grand.
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Grand. Maybe consolidate both writers in ref 6, as "David Wilcox & Ethan Gross (writers)". Up to you, entirely stylistic.
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Scope is grand.
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Neutral and unbiased.
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Stable and uncontroversial.
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
One image is free, the other one's rationale seems solid enough, might need a little more beefing up but it suffices.
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
Just on hold to see what you do with the 1A issues up there, nothing else is major at all. GRAPPLE X 01:52, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I edited the article per many of your suggestions. There were two references to Twin Peaks (Chen and the cherry pie thing), so I felt I should keep the sentence the same. I also didn't change the episode reference template, as I like to maintain consistency with other Fringe articles. Thanks for the review! Ruby 2010/2013 04:20, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Good enough for me. Well done! GRAPPLE X 15:09, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Immortality (Fringe). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:22, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]