Talk:Son of God (TV series)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Son of God (TV series)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk · contribs) 03:29, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found.

Linkrot: mone found. Jezhotwells (talk) 03:33, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

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):

   It was first broadcast in the United Kingdom on 1 April 2001, yet Son of God ran for a single series of three episodes, Please make it clear that it was the first episide which was broadcast on 1 April

   Done.

   others remarked that it was dumbed down went off on some strange tangents. misdsing "and"?

   Added.

   and was executively produced by Ruth Pitt, "and the executive produder was Ruth Pitt" is better

   Replaced.

   Despite not being religious, he was drawn to programme for its use of scientific and historical information. missing definite article.

   Added.

   The completed programme ultimately featured more than an hour and a half of Whitbourn's music "ultimately" is uneccessary here

   Removed.

   who employed techniques similar to ones used in the recent BBC series Walking with Dinosaurs. recent is a potentially dated term, give a date.

   Done.

   astrologers from around time of Herod the Great would have believed that the constellation Aries would have symbolised his kingdom and the lands that he controlled missing definite article

   Added.

   where Jesus is traditionally was to have spent 40 days and nights being tempted by the devil. ?? ungrammatical

   Rewritten.

   a retired medical artist from the Unit of Art in Medicine at the University of Manchester Why the capitalization?

   Removed.

   Actually, I now see that is the name of a department so I have recapitalized. Jezhotwells (talk) 11:10, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

   Critical reaction to Son of God was mixed. The series received praise from commentators such as Andrew Billen of New Statesman missing definite article

   Where? The magazine's official title is "New Statesman" rather than "The New Stateman".

   Indeed it is, but I meant "of the New Statesman" I have copy-edited to this effect. Jezhotwells (talk) 11:10, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

   It was repeated during March the following year, and gained a figure of 1.5 million viewers per episode. Was this in the US or the UK?

   Added.

   The series was nominated for two awards, both for the computer-generated images created by graphics team Red Vision. The show received a nomination at the 2001 LEAF Awards, and won an Outstanding Achievement award at the 2001 Royal Television Society North Awards. Were the two awards the LEAF and RTSN? It is not clear in the way it is currently phrased.

   Rewritten.

   It was also repeated on Christmas Day 2002 and 2003. Where - UK or US?

   Added.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Spotchecks show statements are supported by sources, sources appear RS, no evidence of OR

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Sufficient detail without uneccessary trivia

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   NPOV

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   Stable

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):

   Two images have correct license or NFUR and vaptions, but File:Race of Jesus.ogv has contradictory information in the NFUR. An 18-second video sample from episode two of the BBC history series Son of God. and Extracted from episode three of Son of God Needs sorting out.

   Done.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   On Hold for seven days for issues above to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 04:10, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

   OK, good to go. I am happy to list this as a good article. Jezhotwells (talk) 11:10, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

   Thank you very much for the review, Jezhotwells! A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 17:05, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Son of God (TV series). 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/20120207183841/http://lass.calumet.purdue.edu/cca/gmj/fa07/gmj-fa07-selznick.htm to http://lass.calumet.purdue.edu/cca/gmj/fa07/gmj-fa07-selznick.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/sog/%7D%7D

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) 00:43, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Jewish face

"The Final Hours" ends with a forensic facial reconstruction of a Jew, not Jesus. 84.94.37.73 (talk) 16:18, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

A Jewish neurocranium is much more robust than a non-Jewish one. תיל"ם (talk) 14:50, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

References