Talk:The X-Files season 8

Sources to expand Within (The X-Files)

• Bush, Michelle (2008). Myth-X. Lulu.com. pp. 147–149. ISBN 1435746880.
• Kessenich, Tom (2002). Examinations: An Unauthorized Look at Seasons 6-9 of the X-Files: Featuring the Reviews of Unbound I. Trafford Publishing. pp. 148–150. ISBN 1553698126.
• Kellner, Douglas (2003). Media Spectacle. Routledge. p. 155. ISBN 0415268281.
• "X-Files". Cinefantastique. Vol. 33, no. unknown issue. 2001. p. 42. 'Within' creates a nice aura of tension and suspense, with suspicion all around

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:The X-Files (season 8)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   In the Plot overview, "Billy Miles, a multiple abductee who disappeared on the same night as Mulder, is returned deceased but his dead body is apparently resurrected and restored to full health", remove "apparently", not a good word to use. Same section, "...Mulder, Doggett and Skinner learn that an alien virus recently created in secret by members of the United States government has replaced several humans", "has" should be "have". Same section, "They have somehow learned that Scully's baby is a miraculously special child", is "somehow" really necessary? Same section, "...Scully delivers an apparently normal baby while the alien supersoldiers surround her", "apparently"? In the Casting section, "Season finale "Requiem" was written by Carter" ---> "Requiem", the season finale, was written by Carter", something like that. In the Reception section, "The three first episodes of season eight average about 12.99 million viewers, while the previous seasons three first episodes averaged about 12.97 million viewers" ---> "The first three episodes of season eight averaged about 12.99 million viewers, while the previous seasons first three episodes averaged about 12.97 million viewers". Same section, who's "Amy H. Sturgis"? Same section, "Jesse Hassenger from PopMatters was throughout negative to the new season, claiming that Patrick was miss-cast and calling David Duchovny's appearances as Fox Mulder shallow" ---> "Jesse Hassenger from PopMatters gave a negative review to the season, claiming that Patrick was miss-cast and calling David Duchovny's appearances as Fox Mulder shallow", something like that. Same section, "Entertainment Weekly reviewer Ken Tucker said that Patrick's portrayal of Doggett was "Hardboiled alertness" ---> "Entertainment Weekly reviewer Ken Tucker said that Patrick's portrayal of Doggett was "hardboiled alertness". Same section, "Anita Gates from The New York Times said that most fans had "Accepted" the introduction of the character and further stated that he actually looked "Like a Secret Service Agent", "Accepted" ---> "accepted", the "A" is not capitalized in the review. Same section, "Kathie Huddleston from Sci Fi Wire commented on the absence of Mulder, and said that while Patrick is a "fine actor," Dogget was "Way-too-serious" to be Mulder's replacement" ---> "Kathie Huddleston from Sci Fi Wire commented on the absence of Mulder, and said that while Patrick is a "fine actor", but that Dogget was "Way-too-serious" to be Mulder's replacement".

   Check.

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   In the lead, link "horror" to its correspondence article. In the Plot overview, "Billy Miles" is linked to a professional mixed martial artist. Is that correct? Also, "Billy Miles" should be linked once. In the Themes section, link "Deadalive" once. In the Development section, "...Patrick's (Doggett) perhaps most well-known role prior to The X-Files, that of the liquid-metal T-1000 android in Terminator 2: Judgment Day" ---> "...Patrick's (Doggett) perhaps most well-known role prior to The X-Files, that of the liquid-metal T-1000 android in Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991)", so that it can provide context for the reader. In the Reception section, "DVD Times", "PopMatters" and "Sci-Fi Wire", are not supposed to be italicized. In the Episodes section, fix the contractions, per here.

   Check.

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   Reference 18 and 28 should not be in all capitals, per here. There are two dead links.

   Check.

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   C. It contains no original research:

   Are "Compilation", "Airlock Aplha", "Movieweb" and "Revolution Science Fiction" reliable sources?

   The "Compilation" have been right on all the ratings, viewership etc, several sources agree with the website such as Resist or Serve: The Official Guide to the X-Files Volume 4 and The Complete X-Files. The only reason why i don't use those books on this article, is that the user who owns the books only have them from Seasons 1-7, and i think 9. "Airlock Alpha" has been used on various Stargate GA's if i remember right. I replaced the "Movieweb" source and removed the "Revolution..." source because i did not have anything to replace it.--TIAYN (talk) 18:00, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

   Just needed to know and check.

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

   In the Themes section, is this ---> "...would also point to that humanity is a greater danger to itself, even with all our technology and progress", supposed to sound like POV?

   Check.

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   File:Opening Sequence TXF.jpg needs a lower resolution.

   How do i do that? --TIAYN (talk) 18:00, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

   Upload the same image, only this time it should be no larger than 300 pixels on one side.

   Check.

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 17:20, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you to TIAYN who got the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:11, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing and passing the article ThinkBlue. :D --TIAYN (talk) 19:15, 31 August 2009 (UTC)