Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
I'm going to stop there and request that the article be copyedited before the review proceeds. I recommend finding an editor who has not worked on the article, so that a set of fresh eyes will have an objective first look.
A quick glance over the rest shows:
This is not a comprehensive list, but it should give a good idea of what the problems are. I will place it on hold to allow for copyediting and for these concerns to be addressed and/or discussed. Any questions or concerns can be left here, as I have placed this page on my watchlist. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan ( talk) 05:50, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I've taken care off pretty much everything you asked above, I'll contact a Copy-Editor A.S.A.P. and I'll make the image smaller when I find some spare time. One note though, I don't get what you mean with the sentence "thought the episode was "pretty good"" being incomplete.
Thank you for your review.-- Music 26/ 11 19:37, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply and for your work on the article. To be honest, the copyediting helped, but quite a few grammatical issues were left. I went through the article and did a quick copyedit. I also noticed that one of the references was going to expire soon, so I created a permanent archive of the page through Webcite and included it in the citation. I believe that the article meets the six GA criteria. If you have any questions or comments about this review, please get in touch. If you feel that I have overstepped my boundaries as a reviewer, please feel free to ask for a second opinion on this review at WT:GAN (please note that GA reviewers are encouraged to fix minor problems, but some editors prefer reviewers to list concerns rather than addressing them directly).
With all that said, congratulations! I appreciate your hard work on this article, and I hope the results are satisfying. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan ( talk) 05:56, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
I'm going to stop there and request that the article be copyedited before the review proceeds. I recommend finding an editor who has not worked on the article, so that a set of fresh eyes will have an objective first look.
A quick glance over the rest shows:
This is not a comprehensive list, but it should give a good idea of what the problems are. I will place it on hold to allow for copyediting and for these concerns to be addressed and/or discussed. Any questions or concerns can be left here, as I have placed this page on my watchlist. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan ( talk) 05:50, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I've taken care off pretty much everything you asked above, I'll contact a Copy-Editor A.S.A.P. and I'll make the image smaller when I find some spare time. One note though, I don't get what you mean with the sentence "thought the episode was "pretty good"" being incomplete.
Thank you for your review.-- Music 26/ 11 19:37, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply and for your work on the article. To be honest, the copyediting helped, but quite a few grammatical issues were left. I went through the article and did a quick copyedit. I also noticed that one of the references was going to expire soon, so I created a permanent archive of the page through Webcite and included it in the citation. I believe that the article meets the six GA criteria. If you have any questions or comments about this review, please get in touch. If you feel that I have overstepped my boundaries as a reviewer, please feel free to ask for a second opinion on this review at WT:GAN (please note that GA reviewers are encouraged to fix minor problems, but some editors prefer reviewers to list concerns rather than addressing them directly).
With all that said, congratulations! I appreciate your hard work on this article, and I hope the results are satisfying. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan ( talk) 05:56, 20 October 2008 (UTC)