Talk:Petarded

Petarded 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
July 22, 2009	Good article nominee	Listed

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Animation: Family Guy Low‑importance

	Animation portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Family Guy work group (assessed as Mid-importance).

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.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Comedy Mid‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy 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.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1

Major inaccuracy in article

"The "Rock Me Amadeus" reference almost didn't make into broadcast in the show;[5] Series producers encountered difficulty tracking down Falco, the artist, however after many attempts, they were able to track him down and obtain rights for the music."

Seeing as this episode was written in 2005 and Falco died in 1998, I highly doubt the veracity of this statement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.113.33.20 (talk) 02:35, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

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

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
In the lead, you might want to say where the episode broadcasted. In the Plot, "doesn't" ---> "does not", per WP:CONTRACTION. In the Production section, "weren't" ---> "were not". Same section, "couldn't" ---> "could not". Is there any info. available to why Cloris Leachman and LeVar Burton guest starred?
Half-check. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 15:17, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't find any info regarding the guest stars.--Music26/11 08:51, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Its fine, I guess. Check. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 16:38, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
Dates need to be unlinked. In the Cultural references section, "The episode is based in the movie I Am Sam" ---> "The episode is based in the 2001 movie I Am Sam", so that it can provide context for the reader. Same section, why do you have "1985 in music" linked? Same section, italicize "Time for Timer". In the Reception section, "[...] I will say there are some very good episodes in this set, starting with "Petarded," which sees Peter declared mentally retarded. The ways he takes advantage of this status is classic "Family Guy" material, while the musical montage here, involving phone calls all over town, is actually quite funny. Plus, the appearance of the Naked, Greased-Up Deaf Guy gave hope that the creators still had that sense of the bizarre in them", "Petarded" needs to be 'Petarded', no quotations on "Family Guy". Per MOS:QUOTE. Same section, "Kim Voynar of TV Squad gave the episode a mixed review, saying "[...] it just seemed to wrap up a little too quickly for me, like they ran out of time and were like, "Oops, let's wrap this up now". Other than that quibble, though, it was a fairly funny episode", "Oops, let's wrap this up now" ---> 'Oops, let's wrap this up now.'
Half-check.
Done.--Music26/11 08:51, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Check. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 16:38, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

C. It contains no original research:

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
File:Petarded.PNG needs a lower resolution.
Half-check.
Done.--Music26/11 08:51, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Check. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 16:38, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!

-- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 21:06, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A little bit to do. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 15:17, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you have any comments left, I won't be able to adress them because I'm going to Sweden tomorrow. So if there's stuff left to do, please be patient? Thank you.--Music26/11 08:51, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, all my concerns are addressed. Ooh, Sweden? Have fun. Okay, getting back to business. Thank you to Music for getting the stuff I left at the talkpage, cause I have gone off and passed the article to GA. Congrats. ;) -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 16:38, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Netflix and part removed

Why did Netflix include the part "The Family Guy orchestra sung and recorded a song for a sequence which showed several Quahog citizens learning and talking about Peter being declared as retarded.[4] However, this was removed from the episode because broadcasting standards believed it used the word "retarded" too many times." that was originally removed? Accdude92 (talk) 20:11, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]