Talk:Petarded/GA1

GA Review

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