Talk:Male Unbonding

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good article Male Unbonding has been listed as one of the Arts good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
May 10, 2008 Good article nominee Listed

This article is within the scope of the Seinfeld WikiProject, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Seinfeld-related articles. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page and add your name to the members list.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
Comedy Portal
This article is within the scope of the Comedy WikiProject, which collaborates on articles related to comedy, comics, comedians, comedy movies, and the like. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Elaine

This is not the first episode to show Elaine. I say we delete the line. 64.122.95.110 14:34, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I believe this was refering to the production order. I fixed it so it makes sense now. BocoROTH 07:51, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Male-unbonding.JPG

Image:Male-unbonding.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 16:23, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GA Review

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

I've put the GA nomination on hold. The prose needs some work and there is some trivial information. Otherwise, this is in good shape. Let me know if the following issues have been fixed or if you disagree with any aspect of my review.

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    The prose is somewhat choppy. This is a minor problem throughout the article. For instance, there are a couple of instances where three sentences in a row start with the same word and the lead needs a copy edit (but these are not the only problems). I'd like to see this improve before I pass the article. I'll help out where I can.
    B. MoS compliance:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    I've passed this, but with a minor stipulation. Can it be confirmed that the Nielsen rating for this episode comes from the DVD commentary? If so, that's great. If not, it needs to be removed.
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
    There are a couple of rather trivial pieces of information in the Production section. This is probably nitpicking on my part, but I'd like to see those removed.
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

[edit] Other Observations

Although it can clearly be inferred from the text, the article never mentions that this is a season one episode (excluding the infobox). This should probably be mentioned in the lead and in the Production section.

I've tried to make the improvements that you asked for and I think that it is now good enough to pass. ISD (talk) 08:58, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
You're very close. A few things:
  1. The lead is supposed to be a summary of the article, but it doesn't contain any information from the Reception section.
    I've changed my mind. Seeing how it hasn't won any awards, this probably isn't necessary.
  2. The third paragraph in the production section contains five consecutive sentences that start with the.
  3. The last three sentences of the Production section would be more appropriate in the second paragraph.
  4. I'm still unsure if the Nielsen ratings are sourced in the DVD. If so, good, and if not, then it's probably worth it to find a source. If no source can be found, then I suppose that the ratings can be removed from the article.
  5. What happens to Kramer's pizza place idea?
Please let me know when you've made these changes. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 01:19, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
I've made the changes you've asked for. ISD (talk) 07:21, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
I agree. The article now passes the GA criteria. Nice work! Ice Cold Beer (talk) 07:43, 10 May 2008 (UTC)