Talk:Worlds Apart (Fringe)/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 20:15, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

I'll be glad to take this review. I'll begin by doing a close readthrough of the article, noting any initial issues here, and then will turn to the criteria checklist. Thanks in advance for your work on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 20:15, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Initial readthrough

This is very well-written, and remains clear to someone who doesn't watch the show despite the confusion of the plot (parallel universes, etc.).

• "The idea of shutting down the bridge created by the Machine is brought up" -- by who?
• "plans are made to shut down the bridge before this time runs out" -- by who?
• "known for his work on the science fiction television series Supernatural and Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles among others" -- not sure "among others" is needed in this sentence, which is a bit wordy.

Since these points are so minor, I'm heading straight to the checklist. -- Khazar2 (talk) 20:35, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the review! I removed "among others", but will have to rewatch the episode to clarify who says what (I'm planning on buying the S4 DVD one of these days...). Ruby 2010/2013 21:06, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

My pleasure--thanks for your work on this one, and, from what I see on your user page, many others! -- Khazar2 (talk) 21:29, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Checklist

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Prose is clear and correct, and spotchecks show no evidence of copyright issues.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. 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).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Image is well-selected, as it was identified as the episode's highlight.
	7. Overall assessment.	Obvious pass -- very solid work.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.