Talk:Magnum P.I. (2018 TV series) season 1

Latest comment: 3 years ago by TheDoctorWho in topic GA Review

GA Review edit

This review is transcluded from Talk:Magnum P.I. (2018 TV series, season 1)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Some Dude From North Carolina (talk · contribs) 14:26, 15 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hey, I'll will be giving your article an assessment based on the GA-criteria. Some Dude From North Carolinawanna talk? 14:26, 15 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

Basic stuff and comments edit

I'll be adding more suggestions later on. Some Dude From North Carolinawanna talk? 14:26, 15 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

Added the year after September 27, and archived and all available sources. In my experience first season articles always have both numbers. Hawaii Five-0 (2010 TV series, season 1), MacGyver (2016 TV series, season 1) are both good articles I have worked with promoting that have them (other examples: Superstore (season 1), Pretty Little Liars (season 1), Grey's Anatomy (season 1), Stranger Things (season 1) I could go on). The only time the first season doesn't have both numbers in my experience is where the first season is the only season (Me, Myself & I (TV series), Pretty Little Liars: The Perfectionists) or until a second season table can be added (Lego Masters (American TV series)). TheDoctorWho (talk) 01:38, 16 November 2020 (UTC)Reply
Everything above has been taken care of. TheDoctorWho (talk) 04:57, 16 November 2020 (UTC)Reply
All done! TheDoctorWho (talk) 15:08, 16 November 2020 (UTC)Reply
  • Per MOS:CAPS, change references [68] and [78] so they're not in all caps.
  • In the reception section, "Magnum P.I." should be in italics.
  • I know this isn't common in most articles, but to be consistent, I suggest changing the section title "Release and marketing" to "Marketing and release".
Done, done, and done. TheDoctorWho (talk) 17:07, 16 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

GA overall assessment edit

GA review
(see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  
    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):  
    d (copyvio and plagiarism):  
  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):  

Overall:
Pass/Fail:  

  ·   ·   ·