Talk:Bart Gets Famous/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

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.

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    In the Plot, this sentence ---> "Marge gives Bart a box of items she kept during his stint as a celebrity to him to help him remember the event", reads odd. Maybe if you remove "to him". In the Production section, ""Bart Gets Famous" was the first episode of the series to be directed by Susie Dietter.[8]The design of the insides of the box factory featured in this episode was discussed at great length by director Susie Dietter and executive creative consultant Brad Bird", a space is needed.
    Check.
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
    In the Production section, "Susie Dietter" needs to be linked once.
    Check.
  2. 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:
    In the lead, "The writers chose the phrase "I didn't do it" because they wanted a "lousy" phrase "to point out how really crummy things can become really popular", since there is a direct quote in the lead it would be best to add a ref per WP:LEAD and WP:MOSQUOTE.
    Check.
    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:
  3. 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):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. 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:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    Not that much to do. If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:22, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have taken care of the problems listed above (I hope Scorpion don't mind). Thanks for the review! Theleftorium 21:43, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You are welcome and I'm just doing my part. :) Thank you to Theleftorium for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:22, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]