Talk:It's a SpongeBob Christmas!

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:It's a SpongeBob Christmas!/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Neelix (talk · contribs) 22:01, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

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):

   Paragraphs should be at least three sentences long. The lead should not include any information that is not also included in the body. The article also needs to be copyedited for grammar and punctuation errors. For example, there should not be brackets around the sentence starting "Nickelodeon and CBS...". This sentence would be better linked to the previous sentence by way of a semicolon. "This" is vague when used as a pronoun. The sentence starting "This is the second..." should be rephrased to make "This" a determiner. "Christmas based" qualifies "episode" and should therefore read "Christmas-based". Alternatively, the word "based" can simply be removed.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   This article has referencing problems. For example, Vimeo is not a reliable source. Wired should be italicized and internally linked, as should San Francisco Chronicle. No dates are given for the references other than the access dates. The nick-asia link is dead.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   The article needs more content. For example, the "Trailer" and "Critical response" sections should be expanded. Almost all of the citations are used only once in the article. Surely more information can be drawn from these sources.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   The article is uniformly positive in its estimation of the episode when it should include the negatives as well. For example, there are no negative reviews in the "Critical response" section. Subjective adjectives like "strong" should be removed. The Dawson quotation is too long; a quotation should not take up an entire paragraph.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   The article is stable.

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

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

   There are no image problems.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Mixed/negative review

I had an issue of Entertainment Weekly, and in the "What to Watch" section for that week it had this episode and gave it a B-, saying something the lines of "only die-hard SpongeBob fans and eight-year-olds would find this truly amusing". This would throw a serious clash to the "generally positive" critical response section, and so I feel it deserves merit. However, since then I have thrown out the issue, trying to clean it up, and not knowing that this could be useful. This is only in the print version. Does anybody, by chance, have the issue to get the exact wording, not to mention the exact reference? öBrambleberry of RiverClan 22:26, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:It's a SpongeBob Christmas!/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Zanimum (talk · contribs) 21:11, 27 April 2013 (UTC) Okay, I'm going to take this article on. -- Zanimum (talk) 21:11, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about the delay, it is coming, I promise! -- Zanimum (talk) 21:05, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

That's just OK! After all, it seems that you're really busy. No need to sorry! ;) Mediran (t • c) 07:54, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

• Infobox
  • Production code: should there not be a space between the closing bracket and the second set of numbers?
    • I'm really sorry but I don't get it. What bracket and second set of numbers?
• Lead:
  • While it seems redundant at times, you can't have something in the lead without having it in the rest of the article. Specifically, the sentence about it debuting on CBS. That fact alone makes this episode notable, animation aside, but it needs to be discussed elsewhere. (Does Hispanic Business or TV by the Numbers specifically mention that?)
    •  Done remove the sentence since it wasn't mentioned in the sources.
  • I'd like to see a sentence about the plot itself in the lead. Most of the article is the plot. Perhaps a periphery mention of the Annie, DVD, and the soundtrack?
    •  Done
• Production
  • CHANGE: The episode, which was animated in stop motion, was inspired by the classic TV Rankin/Bass specials, Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer andSanta Claus Is Comin' to Town.[4]
    •  Done
• Release and ratings
  • No digital download? I like tactile release as much as the next person, but I know that most Nick productions are available on iTunes.
    •  Done
• Reception
  • “In 2013, the special was nominated at the 40th Annie Awards...” What are the Annie Awards? (I say that as someone that sent a photographer to them for Wikinews about five years ago.) Yes, people can follow the wikilink, but they shouldn't have to, to find out it's an industry award.
    • How about if it wasn't because I've changed that section into a table.

I'll take a look at plot after this. -- Zanimum (talk) 17:39, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Mediran (t • c) 02:41, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about the delay. All of my comment above, and the comments in GA1 have been addressed. I love the new pull quotes. The only remaining issue with article, can you trim just a teeny bit off some of the run-on sentences in the plot section? I think you can edit a teeny bit, removing unnecessary detail, but keeping the plot intact. Otherwise, it's good to go. -- Zanimum (talk) 20:49, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Zanimum! I think it's  Done! Thanks. Mediran (t • c) 00:47, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Indeed, very good work! -- Zanimum (talk) 11:57, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on It's a SpongeBob Christmas!. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20140718204656/http://www.barb.co.uk/whats-new/weekly-top-10 to http://www.barb.co.uk/whats-new/weekly-top-10
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.annecy.org/annecy-2013/festival/official-selection%3Ac8

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:37, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on It's a SpongeBob Christmas!. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20131203015222/http://www.hispanicbusiness.com/2012/10/19/cbs_to_air_spongebob_christmas_special.htm to http://www.hispanicbusiness.com/2012/10/19/cbs_to_air_spongebob_christmas_special.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121021213915/http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2012/10/18/cbs-announces-new-holiday-special-its-a-spongebob-christmas/153809/ to http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2012/10/18/cbs-announces-new-holiday-special-its-a-spongebob-christmas/153809/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:28, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on It's a SpongeBob Christmas!. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20140222231016/https://www.bbm.ca/_documents/top_30_tv_programs_english/2013/2012-13_12_17_TV_ME_NationalTop30.pdf to https://www.bbm.ca/_documents/top_30_tv_programs_english/2013/2012-13_12_17_TV_ME_NationalTop30.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131203060858/http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/spongebobchristmas.php to http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/spongebobchristmas.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130328060638/http://animatedtv.about.com/od/spongebobsquarepants/fr/Its-A-Spongebob-Christmas.htm to http://animatedtv.about.com/od/spongebobsquarepants/fr/Its-A-Spongebob-Christmas.htm
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.mpse.org/goldenreels/2013awards/pdf/tv/Animation.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:18, 17 November 2017 (UTC)