Talk:Trivia (The Office)

Trivia (The Office) 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.

Trivia (The Office) is part of the The Office (American season 8) 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
February 26, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed
November 7, 2012	Good topic candidate	Promoted

Current status: Good article

Comedy

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Television: Episode coverage / The Office Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by The Office task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Steve Carell cameo?[edit]

Did Steve Carell make a cameo as one of the "Queerenstein Bears"?

There's a lot of speculation about this, but speculation does not a Wikipedia make. There have been no reliable or official sources that state it is true, so please stop adding it to the article.--Gen. Quon (talk) 15:17, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And it's just been confirmed: no he did not.--Gen. Quon (talk) 21:14, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Bobnorwal (talk · contribs) 16:23, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

Overall, I think this article is well on its way, and I just have a few important issues that I'd like you to address before I pass it. I'll put on hold for a week, which I think is usual and should be more than enough time to fix my complaints. And I welcome other reviewers to come in and make any of their own comments. Thanks and good luck

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
I have fixed up the prose to the best of my abilities, but here is what's left:

In the lead: "Dwight goes to Sabre headquarters..." does not adequately explain what Sabre is to people unacquainted with the series.
I removed a few contractions, which the MOS generally frowns upon. There may be more.

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

The ref "The Office Exclusive: 'Til Death's Lindsey Broad Befriends Pam" does not mention the episode "Pam's Replacement".
The article includes a ref of a review from IGN but does not include the review in the Reception section. Why not?
The little bits about the producer and the director of the show cite the show itself. Sure, their names are in the credits, but I highly doubt that there is any mention of how many times they have directed/produced. You'll need another ref for that.
It seems to be "Inside Pulse", not "Indie Pulse".
The Office Tally blog is of questionable reliability. You might want to consider removing it, although the IGN ref covers the same point so this is not a big deal.
RE: ref formatting, at the moment it's not perfect. Noteworthy sources should have links to the wiki articles about them. Magazines and newspapers, like The Wall Street Journal and New York magazine, should have italics around their names. Also,you can safely take out "Huffington Post Staff".

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
I have watched this episode and read plenty of Wikipedia articles on other TV episodes. This article covers all the usual areas of importance and does it in a reasonably comprehensible way.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
Yes, it just reports the facts with no peacocking or silliness.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It hasn't been edited much, in fact, since early this month.
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):
Screenshot is appropriate and properly tagged. Portrait of director is CC, which is great!
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

OK, I believe I've fixed all the issues.--Gen. Quon (talk) 17:07, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And I believe it now meets the criteria for Good Article status. Congratulations. I'm passing it. Bobnorwal (talk) 20:47, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Trivia (The Office). 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.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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) 03:31, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]