Talk:Sexy (Glee)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: TBrandley (talk · contribs) 06:07, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Infobox

• Add the production code in there. If there is not WP:RS found, it is okay.

• Didn't see a WP:RS; will check The Futon Critic. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

• Add the running time in there.

• We haven't used one yet in previous Glee GAs. Is this a GA requirement, or just nice to have? BlueMoonset (talk) 05:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

• List of Glee episodes should have Glee (season 2) above it.

• Done. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Lede

• "American television series" what type of television series (comedy-drama)

• actually, "musical comedy-drama". Now included. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

• and the 37th overall → and the 37th episode overall

• Done. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

• "premiered". An episode can't really premiere, how about "originally aired"

• Fixed. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

• on Fox → on the Fox network

• Done. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

• This episode; In this episode. Re-write perhaps, to "installment", "entry", etc.

• Fixed. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

• "received generally" generally should be first

• The two mean different things: "generally received" is different from "generally positive". I thought the wording chosen was more appropriate. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

• ""Sexy" received generally positive reviews." is short. Perhaps merge, like this: ""Sexy" received generally positive reviews., with many critics commented ..."

• I don't think that would be an improvement. Make the general statement, then have the next sentences go into detail. Short sentences are sometimes the most apt. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

• "also"? nothing is before

• If you meant the first also, I think it was meant to hearken back to the generally positive reviews, with Holly's reception being generally positive as well (though not universally so). However, it isn't ideal, and has been removed. If you meant the second also (the Burt/Kurt scene), it refers back to the previous sentence, and I would prefer to keep it. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

• "according to the Nielsen ratings" is unneeded its directly above "Nielsen ratings"

• Deleted. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

• Nielsen share shouldn't be in lead, just have regular Nielsen ratings, with that stuff expanded upon in "Reception".

• There's nothing to say it can't be in the lead, and it is in the other GAs for the show. I have removed the more specific comparison to the previous show's ratings, however. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Plot

• Per MOS:PUNCT, "Consistent use of the straight (or typewriter) apostrophe ( ' ) is recommended, as opposed to the curly (or typographic) apostrophe ( ’ )." That being said, I see that Kurt’s using that when they should use '

• I actually searched for these, but missed this one (there had been several others). Good eye: thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 05:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Production

• For the image, (pictured) is not needed

• Since both Paltrow and Holly are mentioned in the caption text, I was taught that it helped to specify which (the actress or the character) was being pictured. If you insist, I will remove it, but I thought it was useful; not everyone will know Paltrow (and few will known Holly). BlueMoonset (talk) 05:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

• Referencing problems with some sentences; see unreferenced sections

• Could you please be specific about what you think needs referencing? Unless there's a quote requiring a cite by the end of a sentence, or a cite only applies to the previous sentence, it is allowed for a series of sentences to be covered by the next inline citation. Is there any controversial statement that you feel needs a reference closer than the one given, or is not referenced at all? I'm happy to supply one, if so. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

• "UK" should be "United Kingdom" don't be afraid to write fully

• Fixed; not sure why you think fear comes into it, though. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Reception

• "and was the highest rated show" → "making it highest rated show"

• this change doesn't make grammatical sense: "making" is the wrong tense, and omitting "the" is just wrong. Leaving unchanged. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:12, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• "With its Canadian broadcast" → "Upon its Canadian broadcast"

• "Upon" seemed not ideal, since US and Canadian were simultaneous, so I recast the sentence in a different manner. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:12, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• UK should be written out fully as United Kingdom

• Done here, but there's nothing wrong with abbreviating to UK once United Kingdom has appeared at least once, which it did in Production. If it had been used twice in this section, the second usage would have been UK. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:12, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• "deemed "Sexy" an episode" should be "deemed "Sexy" as an episode"

• No, it's grammatically correct the first way. To my eye, "deemed" ... "as" is an odd construction. A word other than "deemed" should be used if "as" is necessary. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:12, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• Link IGN for its first time; currently, it isn't

• Done. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:12, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• The should be in capitals for "the Wall Street Journal", since "the" is actually in the official newspaper name.

• Done. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:12, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• "very well received". Very is unneeded, as it is repetitive, and unneeded.

• Actually, I thought the intensifier was appropriate in the circumstances, based on the tenor of the reviews and the frequency the storyline was mentioned by said reviewers. I believe it is more accurate to retain the word. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:12, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• "being sung, and VanDerWerff" change "and" to "while"

• adding a "while" there would cause problems with the "while" before the next clause in that sentence. I believe "and" is appropriate where I put it because it is more directly connecting two scenes with the characters. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:12, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• BuddyTV shouldn't be in italics, as its the publisher.

• Done. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:12, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• "described as the "best scene" mistake there. described "it" as the best scene. As seen there, please add "it"

• since it's "which Jen Harper described as the best scene", the "which" precludes adding a grammatically incorrect "it". BlueMoonset (talk) 06:12, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• Unlink Rolling Stone, as its already linked above

• missed that one, thanks. The bulk of the Music section was written first, so it had the links initially, and this was one that I failed to remove after the expansion of Critical reception. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:12, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• Unlink United Kingdom, as per WP:OVERLINK

• Done. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:12, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• "the UK" write out fully to "United Kingdom"

• not necessary; it's redundant to write it out every time, especially after an initial "United Kingdom". BlueMoonset (talk) 06:12, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• "US" should be "United States", or "U.S." in Musical reception

• Please see WP:NOTUSA: "US" is allowed, and also note "Use of periods for initialisms should be consistent within any given article": since "UK" is never given with periods (see MOS:COMMA and MOS:HASH for examples of "UK" use), it's appropriate to use "US" here rather than "U.S." BlueMoonset (talk) 06:12, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
• Further note: I just found the table I'd been looking for in MOS:ACRO. The Miscellaneous initialisms section says under "UK": "Does not need to be written out in full on first use, nor provided on first use in round brackets after the full name if written out." Further, under "US or U.S", it adds: 'In articles with "UK", "UAE", etc., use "US". Some American editors prefer to use U.S. otherwise.' BlueMoonset (talk) 00:17, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• "The" isn't part of "Los Angeles Times", thus, The should be the, without capitals

• Done. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:12, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• "unimpressed" → "not impressed"

• Done. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:12, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• "Afternoon Delight" did not chart" reference/citation needed.

• Done. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:05, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

References

• Ref. 5's publisher is NBCUniversal, not Comcast

• Done. Not sure whether it was Comcast at the time or if it's a longer holdover; all these mergers can render publisher info out of date before too long. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:05, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• Per MOS:PUNCT, "Consistent use of the straight (or typewriter) apostrophe ( ' ) is recommended, as opposed to the curly (or typographic) apostrophe ( ’ )." That said, I see some references (Ref. 6) use that, when is should use the latter.

• Yup, missed that one. Were there any others, or is "some" really "one"? BlueMoonset (talk) 16:05, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• References shouldn't use double quotes ("), but instead use single quotes ('), per WP:MOS referencing guidelines, for many references. Example is Ref. 34

• I think I got them all. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:05, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• Various WP:DASH problems. Example: Ref. 16 has a regular -, but should be an en-dash per WP:DASH

• Done. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:05, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• Ref. 15: Amazon.com is clearly the publisher

• Done there and elsewhere. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:05, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• blog.music.aol.com should be AOL

• Done. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:05, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• Ref. 24: TV by the Number's publisher is TV by the Numbers. Huh, nope, Dit is Zap2it.

• I think it was once, long ago. But it certainly wasn't when the ref was put together in early 2011 (before my time), given the URL. Fixed here and added to the other TVBTN ref. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:05, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• Don't shout in references; please, you are hurting my ears. Lol.

• Are you talking about "THE RATINGS RACE:", or is there something else? BlueMoonset (talk) 06:12, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Yeah; that's what I'm talking about. TBrandley 13:21, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• Done. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:05, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

External links

• Add the "television" portal to the side, with Glee portal
• "on" should be "at"

• Both fixed. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Will finish up soon. For now, this is the review on the infobox, lede, plot, and production. I'll be slowly working through "Reception" and "References". TBrandley 03:37, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! I believe I've covered everything as noted above. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

• Ping. It's been 10 days. Are you planning to come back to this, or should I find someone else to finish it? Please let me know. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:43, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
  • No; I'll do the rest right of this review now. Sorry it's taking me so long; I've been very busy, with the GA reviews, etc. Regards. TBrandley 03:54, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
    • I've added everything to be addressed now. Regards. TBrandley 04:45, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• Will finish off the one from Chart history and the Reference section after a several-hour break. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:12, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Okay; but I probably won't be able to pass the article until August 20, since I'm going on vacation until then. Sorry for any inconvenience. TBrandley 13:21, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

• I've addressed all the issues, and it's ready for you when you get back. However, given the necessary delay, I expect that you won't be picking up any further GANs to review since you are away and have a significant unreviewed backlog besides. New GANs can await your return, too. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:05, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Okay. I'm back. I've made some minor changes, but feel that the article is ready to promote to GA. Cheers, TBrandley 15:32, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

• Thank you! I appreciate the review (and the promotion). BlueMoonset (talk) 18:32, 19 August 2012 (UTC)