Talk:Alex Parrish/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Numerounovedant (talk · contribs) 16:51, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll put up comments soon. NumerounovedantTalk 16:51, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Prose

You could avoid repetiton of American in the opening paragraph.
Same with FBI, I believe the the "FBI recruit" can simply be "recruit" as the mention of the "FBI Academy" makes it obvious.
"U.S intelligence"
I prefer "on and off relationship" as it is lest colloquial.
"as a completely white character" - completely seems to be an odd choice of words.
Not sure what a "talent holding deal" is.
"For her performance as Parrish" - odd phrasing, also, be consistent with use of "Alex" or "Parish" in the article.

Looking at the rest. NumerounovedantTalk 16:47, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Numerounovedant: Done.Krish | Talk 20:48, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article ~~could do without~~ use a lot of trimming, as it has a lot of the lengthy direct quotes, in the production section in particular. NumerounovedantTalk 17:32, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Removed few long quotes and trimmed others.Krish | Talk 02:27, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Some other concerns :

"talent holding deal" - not sure what this means.
"Apart from being the lead in an American series and working in Hollywood" - rather unnecessary.
"Having never auditioned in Bollywood" - same.
"that ABC was doing for the 2015–2016 television season" - doing a script?
"the show became all about her" - sound encyclopedia like at all?
"as a flawed human being who takes charge of her own life" - same.
"becoming the lead character" - repetitive.
"Alex is the focal point and the protagonist of the series" - I think the reader gets it by now.
For the reception section you might want to restructure the paragraphs, each of which could begin with a one line summary of what it talk about.

@Numerounovedant: Done.Krish | Talk 02:19, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I an sorry it took me s long, but this was the first thing I looked at on coming back. There are some obvious neutrality concerns, I hope you re-read it and make necessary changes to make it read more in a more encyclopedia-like fashion. Ping me if you have questions, but you want to go through te article once more. I will re-read once you're done addressing my comments. NumerounovedantTalk 17:32, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Numerounovedant: You can take a look now.Krish | Talk 02:19, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Final Comments

The article needs some cleanup and formatting fixes, but I'll take care of that. Other than that, it looks fine to me. Good job Krish!. It's a Pass. NumerounovedantTalk 10:43, 20 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]