Talk:The X-Files Mythology, Volume 3 – Colonization

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:The X-Files Mythology, Volume 3 – Colonization/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hahc21 (talk · contribs) 04:02, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Review

Overall

• We have one dablink
• No ext. links issues.

Lead

• Lead is pretty well, but second paragraph may be too long; consider splitting into two.

—Hahc21 03:27, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

I split the second into two and beefed the last one up a bit. I feel the prose of the first sentence is a little clunky, though.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 04:24, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Me too. I don't fell that:

• "Volume 3 of The X-Files Mythology collection is a DVD release containing selected episodes from the fifth to the eighth seasons of the American science fiction television series The X-Files."

could be a correct introduction. Maybe:

• "The X-Files Mythology - Volume 3 is the third released DVD collection containing selected episodes from the fifth to the eighth seasons of the American science fiction television series The X-Files."

can do it better. —Hahc21 04:45, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

How's that?--Gen. Quon (Talk) 15:48, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Ok. Fixed. —Hahc21 16:25, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Plot, Background, Reception, Episodes

• Those sections are Ok. I went and made some minor edits to polish the text and remove redundancies, double wording, etc.

Special features

• This section needs a ref. Maybe the lines notes from the DVD? IDK.

Footnotes, External links

• Good.

Please add the ref on special features (or answer with the reason why its needless) to finish the review and pass the article. —Hahc21 20:37, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. I went and added a DVD citation for the special features. How's that?--Gen. Quon (Talk) 21:18, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Great! I enjoyed reading the article. It's well written, broad and focused, properly referenced with inline citations, it meets all MoS guides included on GAC, no edit wars on it, no original research (from what I can verify), it's properly illustrated with images (because they exist). So, passed XD —Hahc21 21:26, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Verdict

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: 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):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

—Hahc21 21:26, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The X-Files Mythology, Volume 3 – Colonization. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://space.com/sciencefiction/tv/xfiles_duchovny_000518_wg.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:45, 1 April 2016 (UTC)