Talk:Where No Fan Has Gone Before/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Johanna (talk · contribs) 01:39, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi again! Should review quite soon with the GA Cup starting! Johanna^{(talk to me!)} 01:39, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Comments

• In the infobox, change "season four" to "season 4"
• I don't think File:Futurama ep65.jpg is necessary. As the design of the Star Trek characters is not a heavy talking point in the article, I would remove it.
• First sentence of second paragraph: either remove the comma after "scrapped" or add an "it was" after "and"
• I would say "to feature the cast of Star Trek to avoid ambiguity.
• Although I think it will be known to most, I would put some indication in the image caption that Shatner's on the left and Nimoy's on the right.
• We can discuss this, but maybe a double image with that and File:David A. Goodman by Gage Skidmore 3.jpg?
• I would pepper ref 2 throughout that first Production paragraph when it is the source.
• The first sentence of the second paragraph, involving the director, got messed up somewhere and is a bit convoluted. Also, I would use another verb than "added" because it makes it sound like it was directly connected to something someone else said.
• "William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy recorded..." later in the sentence, it should be "usually" not "using"
• I would shorten that subsection to just be "cultural references"
• Refs are good per here.

@Miyagawa: Nice work! The only "major" thing for this article is the non-free file up top. Johanna^{(talk to me!)} 03:34, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

@Johanna: Thanks for the review. The non-free file isn't a big issue for me, it was simply there from prior to my work on this article and I would agree that it isn't a point of discussion so I've removed it. I've made those edits as suggested and pulled apart the director bit into two separate sentences. Thanks for pointing out that other image, as I'd missed that one - I've inserted it now. Miyagawa (talk) 17:52, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

@Miyagawa: Wonderful work! Pass. Johanna^{(talk to me!)} 03:12, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

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

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: