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

Reviewer: Secret Saturdays ( talk to me) 17:56, 8 August 2010 (UTC) reply

1. It could use a little more expansion on either "reception" or "production".
2. It has a neutral point of view.
3. There is no edit wars.
4. appropiate use of images
5. It is factually accurate

I'm putting it on hold for some needed expansion. Secret Saturdays ( talk to me) 17:56, 8 August 2010 (UTC) reply

Please provide a more detailed analysis. Thanks. Gage ( talk) 18:32, 8 August 2010 (UTC) reply

Yes please speciyfy what do you wish to be done. -- Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 08:50, 9 August 2010 (UTC) reply

Well, the recepetion section mainly focuses on the negative comments made on the episode, and could use a little more reviews on it(and I changed my mind about the "production" section;that one is just fine.) Secret Saturdays ( talk to me) 17:43, 9 August 2010 (UTC) reply

Thats what i can expaned for the reception on positive grounds. -- Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 18:16, 10 August 2010 (UTC) reply

I give the article a Pass then. Secret Saturdays ( talk to me) 23:20, 12 August 2010 (UTC) reply

Er, really? Did you read the article? Did you happen to notice any sentences ending in commas? Links to disambiguation pages? Did you happen to notice the following sentence: Commented negatively on the Back to the Future references and the very similar Home Alone plotline and"? Or this one: But he did comment positively to some jokes such as the fight between Peter and Quagmire, Stewie capturing Quagmire and Cleveland and Stewie´s reaction to the magazine under Chris bed.? -- Beloved Freak 23:43, 12 August 2010 (UTC) reply

That's exactly why I was reluctant to have this person review the article. Gage ( talk) 23:58, 12 August 2010 (UTC) reply

I myself as the nominator must say that the review felt a bit flat. -- Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 00:13, 13 August 2010 (UTC) reply

I've nominated this article for GAN, but it's gonna be hard now, since the Production section needs to be expanded now! Railer-man ( talk) 01:30, 29 April 2011 (UTC) reply