Talk:It's Late (Degrassi Junior High)/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: PanagiotisZois (talk · contribs) 14:34, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Hello. I'll be taking this article nomination up for review. Great work on this and other Degrassi-related articles BTW. I'll post my comments soon. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 14:34, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Lede and infobox

1. Regarding running time, I think you're supposed to only include the episode's length; without commercials.
2. Although the lede mentions Arthur, he is never brought up within the "Plot" section.
   1. I wasn't too sure about including the Arthur sub-plot because of the guidelines around synopsis lengths. In the 2021 nomination I had to cut down the synopsis extensively.
      1. I understand. Honestly, given that it's a subplot, and a quite negligible at that, it's all right to leave it out. Especially if its inclusion would impede the extant synopsis. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 15:22, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
3. "about controversy" --> "about potentially arousing controversy over the storyline"
   1. Fixed.
4. Regarding the last paragraph, add some information about what critics had to say about the episode.
   1. Done. "The episode was praised in Canada for its portrayal of teenage pregnancy, with critics saying the subject was handled with sensitivity."
5. Switch around the sentences about the Emmy Award and BBC broadcast.
   1. Done.

Plot

1. I'm not sure if the phrase "In the cold open" is necessary.
   1. Removed.
2. Similarly, for the second paragraph you can simply say "Later, Spike arrives...".
   1. Done.
3. Seeing as the article includes a "Cast List", it seems a bit unnecessary to include the actors' names in paranthesis within the "Plot" section. However, I don't have much of a problem if you want them to stay.
   1. I've thought about maybe removing the names because there's a lot of characters mentioned
4. Remove the "and" in "bad mood and fighting with her mother"; replace it with a comma.
   1. Done.
5. "During the class" --> "During class".
   1. Done.
6. "she may have a baby". Would it be better to change that to "she may be pregnant"?
   1. Done.
7. "When she arrives home, she hides it behind her, causing her mother to inquire what is in the bag. After Spike lashes out, she throws the bag to her mother". Could you elaborate a bit on this? Was Spike holding the test and when she arrived home, she tried to hide it behind her back? If so, why did she throw the bag at her mother?
   1. That was me trying to keep it short because of WP:PLOT. I thought that it might have explained itself, but I see what you mean. I changed it to "When she arrives home, her mother asks what she is hiding behind her back. Spike becomes nervous and runs to her room. She is followed there by her mother and asked why she has become so secretive. Spike accuses her mother of not caring about her and that she doesn't "know what it's like to be 14". Her mother gives up but returns when Spike throws the pregnancy test out the door and bursts into tears.". ToQ100gou (talk) 06:39, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
8. "Shane responds" --> "with Shane responding that it was "sort of a big mistake"".

Production

1. "something which Schuyler found problematic"; remove the "something".
2. "later a co-author" to "who later co-authored a".
3. "Schuyler turned down Caitlin" to "skimpy clothing, while Schuyler turned down Caitlin".
4. "was explained Spike" --> "was explained that Spike".
5. The last sentence in the second paragraph is a bit too big. I'd recommend splitting it to two.
   1. Done.
6. "diseases and contraception". End the sentence here.
   1. Done.
7. "two different endings were filmed for the episode". Add a semicolon.

Reception

1. "never as sensitively". However". Given that the sentence ends with a quation, you need to repeat the reference.
2. "Emma in later series". Clarify which series, as the franchise has multiple.
   1. Fixed. Having been editing Degrassi stuff here for two years I've gotten kind of exhausted constantly mentioning the series titles.

BBC

1. "BBC.[20]"It's Late" Add space.

Accolades

1. "Upon accepting the International Emmy, Degrassi co-creator Kit Hood announced that if Spike's baby were to be a boy, it would be named after Ralph Baruch, the president of the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences. However, it was decided to make the baby a girl, and she was named Emma, after the Emmy. Emma, who first appears as a baby in the third season, would become the central character of Degrassi: The Next Generation, with Amanda Stepto returning in a recurring role as Spike"
   1. There are no references proving any of this information. The only source at the end is from 1987.
      1. There is actually a source for the first part for this, one is page 10 in the book Degrassi Generations: The Official 411 from 2005. I must have accidentally deleted them when copyediting. I've added it back now.

References

1. Ensure that all references follow a clear format like this: "25 May 2023", rather than "25-05-2023" or some variation thereof. Moreover, as this is a Canadian series, I think it would go Day-Month-Year.
   1. Done using Use dmy dates.
2. Ensure that references aren't in all caps.
   1. As far as I can tell this is fixed now.
3. Where available wikilink periodicals and whatnot; like Edmonton Journal.
   1. Done.
4. Since source #17 is a book, shouldn't it go in the "Works Cited" section? Also, in which page is this stated?
   1. Done. The page is 108.

All right. These are some of the things I noticed. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 19:52, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Okay, I believe I've fixed everything. Let me know if there was anything I missed. ToQ100gou (talk) 06:53, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

@ToQ100gou: You have done a fantastic job. The only nitpick I have is this: in the last section, you discuss the episode winning the International Emmy Award. The sentence "However, it was decided to make the baby a girl, and she was named Emma, after the Emmy." lacks any reference at the end. Although the following sentence does include a citation, it lists both pages 10 & 137. I'd recommend adding a reference to the sentence I quoted.

Moreover, unless the information provided in the sentences "Upon accepting the International Emmy, Degrassi co-creator Kit Hood announced that if Spike's baby were to be a boy, it would be named after Ralph Baruch, the president of the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences" and also "Emma, who first appears as a baby in the third season, would become the central character of Degrassi: The Next Generation, with Amanda Stepto returning in a recurring role as Spike" appears in both pages 10 & 137, you should cite just one. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 10:56, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Also, I just realized that the article doesn't include any information about the episode's broadcast; at the very least on which date and network is first aired. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 21:30, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Fixed the Emma source. It was actually on page 11. It's been a while since I read the book but I believe similar information was on two separate pages, and I saw an article that cited two pages for something and assumed it was fine.

Well, if the information is provided in both of these pages, and you feel it'd be best to include both, you can include both. I was able to take a look at the book through Google Books, and all of the information cited is indeed in page 11, so that's good. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 14:10, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

As for the date, the reason I haven't included any broadcast information, which I've managed to cite in other Degrassi episode articles, is because there's no actual clear answer on when the episode was originally broadcast. I'm sure one of the sources already used in the article states the network, but I need to check. But the true airdate of this episode is a bit difficult to pin down. IMDb states it aired on March 29, 1987, but Newspapers.com turns up multiple TV listings for that day which contain the previous episode's synopsis (Rick joins an environmental committee), and same in other newspaper archives I have/had access to. The source given in the first paragraph of the lede is from exactly a week later and is of this very episode. However the two reviews from the Toronto Star and the Globe and Mail were in anticipation of an airing on April 19, 1987, yet make no mention of the episode airing previously. It's confusing and why I haven't expanded on the broadcast yet. ToQ100gou (talk) 12:47, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Final

All right, let's go over the GA criteria:

1. Well-written: the prose is clear, consise, and well-written. Moreover, the article also follows the proper layout.
2. Verifiable with no original research: It includes references that are all linked, come from reliable sources, and follow proper style. Statements and facts are properly cited to appropriate source.
3. Broad in its coverage: the page focuses on a variety of real-life aspects of the episode, including production and reception.
4. Neutral: Given that it's an article on an episode, it's difficult to be anything but neutral. Criterion is passed.
5. Stable: All changes that recently took place were part of the GA review.
6. Illustrated: Article includes on image in infobox. The image is properly licenses and has the appropriate size, as a non-free image. Moreover, the image relates to an important scene in the episode and its production.

The article passes the GA review with flying colours. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 14:19, 8 June 2023 (UTC)