Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Mother Tucker/1

Mother Tucker

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review

Result: Kept Ωphois 02:25, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I feel that this article is in serious need of an overall copyedit. Its reception section also consists of just two brief reviews (one of which is from a review of the entire season) and the ratings. This flaw was noted in the talk page by another editor more than a year ago, but was neither responded to nor dealt with since. I also feel that this article may not be notable (Wikipedia:Notability) enough, since its entire notability is pretty much based on one review. Everything else is primary sources. A quick look at the talk page shows that the initial review was very superficial, so I would like a community assessment of it. Ωphois 09:57, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

You know, it's not that difficult to expand an article. You could have contacted me on my talk page about your concerns, as there is no need for a good article reasssessment. I've expanded the article, copyedited it, and added another review to the reception section. Thanks for the help. Gage (talk) 15:19, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

The production section currently gives information about a "Weenie and the Butt" scene. This is mentioned nowhere else in the article, so anyone not familiar with the episode would have no idea what it is referring. I would suggest an extra sentence explaining what occurs in the scene and why the sound effects mentioned are relevant. Ωphois 01:36, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Done. Still don't see why a GAR was necessary to address such issues as minor as that one was. Gage (talk) 02:12, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Seeing as myself and others have alerted your project to these issues in the past to no avail, it was necessary. Ωphois 02:22, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

So it constituted no alert whatsoever, and was only brought up because the season was nominated at WP:GT? Gage (talk) 02:29, 9 August 2010 (UTC)