Talk:I Married Marge

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:I Married Marge/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Hey, I'm gonna review this article, seeing as it's been up for a bit. I'll give a section-by-section review and then I'll give a wrap up with the official GA review template after you've attended to the issues. Let's start! The Flash ^{talk} 05:10, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Lead

• You get a bit redundant with the word "the episode."
• "...Nielsen Rating of 11.9, and was..." ---> "...Nielsen Rating of 11.9 and was..."

 Done

Plot

• None to see.

 Done (obviously) :P

Production

• "Executive producer Sam Simon was concerned that the writers were being "inefficient" with the episode. He thought the three plots of Homer and Marge's marriage, the birth of Bart, and Homer getting his job should have been extended into three episodes instead of one." ---> Make one sentence with a semi-colon or "-" to break it up.
• "The staff were concerned over the animation of the characters' eyes in the episode. The pupils were larger than normal, making the characters look "stoned", and the eyeballs were "too round" and large. The animation artists at the animation studio in South Korea, where much of the animation process takes place, had begun stenciling the eyes with a template, which according to Lynch resulted in "strangely round eyes which look a little too big sometimes and much too perfect. Which is very un-Simpsons like." ---> Same as above
• "Marge was designed with shorter hair in the flashback sequences to make her appear younger. Lynch thought it was nice to see Marge in a "younger, more attractive mode, and sort of watching her progress through pregnancy."" ---> And once more. This will then get redundant, so you might to find a different way to transition all of this.

 Done (I think)

Cultural references

• "At the beginning of his story, Homer mentions the band Supertramp's popularity in the 1980s." ---> Would be better worded as "At the beginning of his story, Homer mentions Supertramp, a band in the 1980s, and their popularity in the time period."
• "...hands on the wall." What wall?

 Done

Reception

• Might want to mention the original broadcast date.
• A lot of it is "Blah blah blah said, 'Blah blah blah'" - it needs more paraphrasing

 Done I paraphrased as much as I could. Please take another look.

Images

• Fair use rationale for the profile images works - low enough resolution.
• File:Jeff Martin.jpg and it's OTRS ticket check out fine. General question, though - personality rights warning? Aren't everyone in the pic members of the writing crew and agreed for it's usage displaying them?
  • I honestly have no idea...
• File:Modern vegas vic souvenirs.JPG obviously works, lol. :P

Thank you for reviewing! Theleftorium 09:30, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I'll give my final say after I check everything again in a moment. The Flash ^{talk} 14:24, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Final say

GA review (see here for criteria)

---

Alright, time to give "final judgment."

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   "The sign outside the wedding chapel is a reference to Vegas Vic, a sign outside Pioneer Club in Las Vegas." It's pretty much "the sign is a reference to a sign" - can you touch up the sentence.

   Rephrased it a bit. Is it better now?

   Yep!

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   Can you put the original airdate somewhere and have a source? If not it's fine, I'm just wondering why there's no source for the airdate as it's not in the text...

   It is in the text. Look closer. :P

   Whoops! How embarrassing .__. lol, Looks good now.

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:

   Needs final issues fixed. The Flash ^{talk} 15:58, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Issues met! I've passed the article - great job! The Flash ^{talk} 19:03, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again! :-) Theleftorium 19:16, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on I Married Marge. 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:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110724223022/http://starwars.com/community/news/media/f20070724/index.html?page=3 to http://www.starwars.com/community/news/media/f20070724/index.html?page=3
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090715011545/http://www.emmys.org/awards/awardsearch.php to http://www.emmys.org/awards/awardsearch.php

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} 03:22, 2 July 2016 (UTC)