Talk:Twilight Zone: 19 Original Stories on the 50th Anniversary
Latest comment: 14 years ago by Maclean25 in topic GA Review
 | Twilight Zone: 19 Original Stories on the 50th Anniversary has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on February 1, 2010. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the only Rod Serling short story in the 2009 Twilight Zone anthology was called the least Twilight Zone-like story in the collection? | |||||||||
| This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GA Review
edit- This review is transcluded from Talk:Twilight Zone: 19 Original Stories on the 50th Anniversary/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: –MuZemike 23:30, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Just one slight prose issue in the "Publication and reception" section: McDonnell noted that the least Twilight Zone-like story was the Rod Serling's own "El Moe", and that ... ? least what? I think you're missing a word in there (I think it's "liked", but I'm not 100%, which is why I'm leaving that to you). Otherwise, prose is great, everything is verified and all the sources are reliable, the table complies with the Manual of Style, and the image is well-within the WP:NFCC. It's a little short, but it covers all the important points that is required at WP:GACR#3. Once you correct that one prose issue, it should be good to go. –MuZemike 23:30, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- A couple of other things to remember in the future is to try and add alt text to the image whenever you get a chance. The other thing is to remember to always italicize, in both the prose and in the citations, all occurrences of the title and other books and print publications. –MuZemike 00:24, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
Passed. [1] looks good. –MuZemike 05:08, 2 April 2010 (UTC)- Thank you for the review. It is short so let me know if you find any sources out there that haven't already been included. maclean (talk) 05:23, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
