Talk:Grey's Anatomy season 3/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: TRLIJC19 (talk · contribs) 13:47, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll be reviewing. TRLIJC19 (talk) 13:47, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll read through the article and list any existent issues below. TRLIJC19 (talk) 13:47, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Issues

• Remove the cast picture and Katherine Heigl's picture as you are only allowed to have one non-free picture per article, which is the DVD cover, per WP:NFCC. Plus, you can't use a non free picture of a living person, so Heigl's would need to be deleted anyways. If you want to use a picture of Heigl, use the one from her page.

But the season one page and her page have more non-free pictures. Is it compulsory to delete those in this article? I believe they are perfect for the article. Jonathan Harold Koszeghi (talk) 14:26, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

First of all, Katherine's article contains 2 free pictures, they're not non free. Also, you have to delete the other one from Season one, it must have slipped my mind. If you don't remove it, I'll have to delist the article as GA because it would fail Criteria 6A. It doesn't matter if they're perfect for the article, it's copyright violation which is illegal. I see you've removed the one of Heigl, but remove the cast one immediately or the article will be quick failed. TRLIJC19 (talk) 23:16, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done Jonathan Harold Koszeghi (talk), 20 May 2012 (UTC)

• Second paragraph of lead, this sentence, "The season aired a two-hour episode who served as a backdoor pilot for the upcoming spin-off", where it says 'who served', it should say 'which served'.

 Done Jonathan Harold Koszeghi (talk) 15:10, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

• Production needs to be expanded to cover more than Private Practice.

 Not done I haven't found anything. But I believe that the backdoor pilot, which was an episode of the third season, is about enough. What do you suggest? Jonathan Harold Koszeghi (talk) 08:31, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

It is not nearly enough. This is not an article on Private Practice. In fact, there is too much information about it. If there is not other info added and some Private Practice info removed, the article will fail under both sections of Criteria Three. TRLIJC19 (talk) 11:49, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

I couldn't find anything! Should I just add general information about filming that can be found on Grey's Anatomy? Jonathan Harold Koszeghi (talk) 11:46, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that's good. Also remove some info on Private Practice. Make PP the second paragraph. TRLIJC19 (talk) 13:16, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done Jonathan Harold Koszeghi (talk) 17:56, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

• Reference the crew, as was done in the Season One article, with the note.

 Done Jonathan Harold Koszeghi (talk) 19:11, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

• This sentence in cast, "Katherine Heigl portrayed fellow intern Dr. Isobel "Izzie" Stevens who decides to quit her job after beginning a relationship with the now deceased pacient Denny Duquette.", it should say patient, not pacient.

 Done Jonathan Harold Koszeghi (talk) 15:10, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

• In cast, credit Derek as chief of neuro.

 Done Jonathan Harold Koszeghi (talk) 15:10, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

• If more info can be found on reviews of the season in whole, not just certain characters (mainly Izzie), then include it.

 Done Jonathan Harold Koszeghi (talk) 08:03, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

• Last sentence of ratings isn't referenced.

 Done Jonathan Harold Koszeghi (talk) 19:11, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

• This sentence in awards, "T.R. Knight was also nominated for his performance in the third season in the "Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Drama Series" category, which was eventually won by Terry O'Quinn, due to his performance in the third season of Lost.", don't include who won it, if they're not relevant to the show. Instead of including the winner, include what episode T.R. was nominated for.

 Done Jonathan Harold Koszeghi (talk) 15:10, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

• Again under awards, "Elizabeth Reaser and Kate Burton were nominated for "Outstanding Guest Actress in a Drama Series", for their performances as Rebecca Pope and Ellis Grey, respectively, but lost to Law & Order: Special Victims Unit's Leslie Caron", include the episodes nominated for, and take out who won.

 Done Jonathan Harold Koszeghi (talk) 15:10, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

• Expand References 20-44, to include what website they're coming from, and if existent, the author.

I don't know what you are referring to. Isn't the website they're coming from written at "url" and "publisher"? What else can I write? Jonathan Harold Koszeghi (talk) 19:25, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

No, the website is "ABCMediaNet". Include that with all of the references. TRLIJC19 (talk) 23:20, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done Jonathan Harold Koszeghi (talk) 08:41, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

• Preferably standardize the dates on all the references. For example, some list dates as 2009-08-24, while others as August 24, 2008. I'd recommend using the August 24, 2008 format, as it's easiest to read at a glance.

 Done Jonathan Harold Koszeghi (talk) 19:25, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

 Not done References 2, 3, 4, and 14 still do not have the correct date format. TRLIJC19 (talk) 23:22, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done Sorry, skipped them accidentally. All done now. Jonathan Harold Koszeghi (talk) 14:57, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

• Add a caption to the DVD cover art in the infobox.

 Done Jonathan Harold Koszeghi (talk) 14:57, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

• The first sentence of the second paragraph of the lead talks about very good reception to the season, yet the critical reception section is mainly negative. Perhaps rephrase the sentence of the lead.

 Done Jonathan Harold Koszeghi (talk), 24 May 2012 (UTC)

I am putting the review on hold so the nominator can assess the problems. Please fix these issues within seven (7) days and then I'll continue on with the review. If these issues are not fixed within the limit, then the nomination will unfortunately have to be failed. To make it easier for me, I would prefer that after you fix each issue, you put the "done" template ( Done) ({{done}}) after it or the "not done" ( Not done) ({{notdone}}) template but explaining why you didn't make the change. Looking forward to finishing the review. TRLIJC19 (talk) 13:47, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Review

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

1. It is reasonably well written.

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

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

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, where possible and appropriate.

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

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Since all issues have been addressed, the article now meets the good article criteria and I'm happy to sign it off. Great job to the nominator for all your hard work on the review and article. Happy editing! TRLIJC19 (talk) 18:18, 25 May 2012 (UTC)