Talk:6955 kHz/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Glimmer721 (talk · contribs) 17:12, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will review shortly. Glimmer721 ^talk 17:12, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

Good, just a few small things.

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
See comments below
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
How is this a reliable source? (Unless the uploader is a member of the cast/crew)
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
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):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
Good, just a few things. The one reference is the main problem.

Comments[edit]

Did some wikilinking in the plot sections to characters.
"Edward provides his theory of the numbers stations to Peter and Fauxlivia, that it is a signal left by the "First People", an advanced civilization that existed before the mass extinction event." Replaced first comma with colon. But what mass extinction event? The article it is linked to lists several in our history, but I'm guessing it's part of the Fringe universe. If so, it is in-universe and needs to be explained from a real-world POV.

I'm not sure how to answer this one. The series simply describes it as a "mass extinction event", so I don't know if they made it up for the series, or are referring to an actual event. I change "the mass extinction event" to "a mass extinction event" to make it more clear that it may be one of the many shown in that wikilink. Also, there is no section on the event in the Mythology of Fringe, hence the mass extinction event" wikilink. Ruby 2010/2013 18:24, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine, as it explains that it is not an event specific to the Fringe universe. Glimmer721 ^talk 20:08, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What's the Massive Dynamic? I tried searching, but it reirects to the main TV series article.

Found appropriate wikilink, and also added a short descriptor Ruby 2010/2013 18:24, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your review! Ruby 2010/2013 18:26, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I'm not sure if you saw above, but the only thing left is the questionable reliability of this. Glimmer721 ^talk 20:08, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, must have missed that one. I am not sure who uploaded the production images on Flickr, but I believe they are completely reliable (I've seen the episode (of course), and the images match up directly to it). I'm not sure what you see that is threatening its reliability. Could you elaborate? Thanks, Ruby 2010/2013 03:10, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point but if it is not uploaded by a member of the cast or crew than it might not be considered reliable. Hmm. I think I'm going to ask for a second opinion on this one. Glimmer721 ^talk 23:32, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Are flicker images considered as reliable source? Anyone can upload anything on Flicker. ASHU^IND 07:02, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And as User:Ruby2010 said that images match with the episode, for that I'll like to say that articles are written in such a way that those who have never seen such episodes get to know what are they about. If one has never seen that series how is that person suppose to confirm reliability. ASHU^IND 07:07, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All the Flickr source is being used for is this statement: "Chappelle shot the episode in September 2010, with some of the scenes set at a dug-out lot in Vancouver.[3]" You don't have to be a member of the cast or crew to observe filming (there are always plenty of bystanders at every film/television production set). And I'm not sure I know what Ashliveslove's second comment is talking about. The statement "If one has never seen that series how is that person suppose to confirm reliability" could be true for any article. Ruby 2010/2013 17:51, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I meant that like in my country India we don't get some series shown so we have to get their DVD's but before that we refer to such articles on wiki to check whether its worth buying or not. So when a well confirmed resource is there we can trust it to be true. Its just my personal opinion since I am also the one who is unaware of this series and when I saw it thought of rather watching it. ASHU^IND 17:33, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A question: If the reference is declared unreliable and it is removed along with what it supports, will the information of the article be compromised? Glimmer721 ^talk 23:45, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have asked the folks at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Flickr as a source? to weigh in on the source's reliability. Thanks, Ruby 2010/2013 19:18, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The consensus would seem to be against using Flickr as a RS. I have removed it. Hopefully that's all that was left for this review! :) Ruby 2010/2013 03:38, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed that it was filmed in September 2010 from the lead and it is fine now. Thank you for your patience :) Glimmer721 ^talk 21:37, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]