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

Reviewer: Koopatrev ( talk · contribs) 14:35, 30 May 2012 (UTC) reply

I will review this article soon (before June 4, 2012). Koopatrev ( talk) 14:35, 30 May 2012 (UTC) reply

Reviewing now. Koopatrev ( talk) 08:48, 2 June 2012 (UTC) reply

• Prose is fine, well written
• Images are of good quality and clear, they are tagged with copyright statuses and has a suitable caption on

• The writers should be listed in two lines with <br />  Done by -- Gen. Quon ( talk) 03:49, 4 June 2012 (UTC) reply

• "The episode originally aired on Fox in the United States on December 11, 2011." "United States" could be linked.  Done Per Wiki Manual of Style, this isn't necessary.-- Gen. Quon ( talk) 03:49, 4 June 2012 (UTC) reply

• "Carter is reluctant at first (since he doesn't want to leave out a six-billion dollar company), but eventually ..." Change "doesn't" to "does not".  Done by -- Gen. Quon ( talk) 03:49, 4 June 2012 (UTC) reply
• Link the first "Joe" you can see to " Joe Swanson"  Done by -- Gen. Quon ( talk) 03:49, 4 June 2012 (UTC) reply

• A source is needed for the first statement in that paragraph.
• See this section for problems with sources.  Done (change done by TBrandley ( talk)) Koopatrev ( talk) 06:41, 3 June 2012 (UTC) reply

Nothing wrong so far.  Done

• A section is needed for reviews from critics.

• Family Guy Wiki is not a reliable source.  Done (change done by Tbrandley ( talk)) Koopatrev ( talk) 06:41, 3 June 2012 (UTC) reply

I'm going to put this on hold until these problems are solved.

This article is going to fail if no changes/improvements are to be made by June 9, 2012, 08:48 (UTC). Koopatrev ( talk) 06:36, 3 June 2012 (UTC) reply

Final review (sorry I'm over an hour late but that's ok) Koopatrev ( talk) 10:07, 9 June 2012 (UTC) reply

1. It is well written.

Prose quality:

Follows MOS:

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable;.:

References to sources:

Citations to reliable sources, where required:

No original research:

The "cultural references" section is still lacking some sources for some statements. In source 3 you don't really see anything that says anything about the cultural references of this episode.

3. It is broad in coverage:

Major aspects:

The section for reviews from critics in the "reception" section is still missing. However there is still a part for U.S. viewers and ratings.

Focused:

4. It is written in a neutral point of view.:

Fair representation without bias:

5. Reasonably stable?

No edit wars etc:

6. Includes images, where appropriate.:

Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

Overall:

Pass or Fail: Sorry this probably has to fail, some parts are still lacking information.