# Talk:Best Day Ever

This review is transcluded from Talk:Best Day Ever/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Dom497 (talk · contribs) 18:48, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality, no copyvios, spelling and grammar: 

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists: 

Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section: 

B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary: 

C. No original research: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects: 

B. Focused: 

Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias: 

Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc: 

Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: 

B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: 

Overall:
Pass or Fail: 
Pass!--Dom497 (talk) 01:11, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
Wow! Thank you very much Dom497 for the pass! Cheers! :) Mediran (t • c) 01:27, 17 August 2013 (UTC)


### Comments
"..but various things go wrong so he sacrifices his day" - He scarifies his day to do what? Because this in the lead, just quickly mention why.--Dom497 (talk) 19:32, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 Fixed I've changed that sentence. 10:14, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
"...and Larry Leichliter served as animation director" - Was Larry part of the group that wrote the song or just animated the song? If so, I think this should be put into a separate sentence (after the first one) saying that he animated the song.--Dom497 (talk) 19:32, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 Fixed Leichliter actually directed the episode itself. 10:14, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
"...The featured song "The Best Day Ever" was composed by Tom Kenny, SpongeBob's voice actor, and Andy Paley" - Did Andy play a voice in the song/show? If so, make that clear. If not, nothing needs to be changed.
No.
"The song was originally a part of The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie soundtrack that was released on November 9, 2004" - Ref 4 was published before the release date. Therefore, at the time, the date was a scheduled date and nothing was set in stone as things could change easily. Though I'm pretty sure the date didn't change, can you try and find a ref that says it was indeed released on November 9 just for the sake of reliability/original research?--Dom497 (talk) 19:32, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
I think that's not necessary as there is Ref 5 to verify it.
Maybe I'm blind, but when does it say the release date in ref 5?--Dom497 (talk) 11:54, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
I'm very sorry. That Ref 5 was there to support the fact that "The Best Day Ever" is included in the film soundtrack. BTW, it's already  Added! 13:03, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
Why are you sorry? We're all humans; we make mistakes.--Dom497 (talk) 15:46, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
Is IGN reliable? Isn't this a blog/fan-like website?--Dom497 (talk) 19:32, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
IGN is an entertainment website/company. It's no blog, it's an article.
"At the time, Kenny, with Paley, is working for an album..." - They're still working on it??? I'm sure this is a typo but I don't want to change anything as you probably know more than me about this topic.--Dom497 (talk) 19:32, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 Fixed Sorry about that. :)
"The team of the 2004 feature film needed two extra filler tracks for the soundtrack." - Sound track for the movie or album?--Dom497 (talk) 19:32, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
For the film soundtrack.
Now I'm just being pessimistic, but how reliable is ref 6?--Dom497 (talk) 19:32, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
Fred Entertainment is a pop-culture website and I think it's reliable enough with Kenneth Plume conducting the interview in the Ref.
Is there a ref for the table?--Dom497 (talk) 20:38, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
What table?
"Track listing"...maybe a better word to use was list. Just stick a ref at the top of the No. section that suports the whole list of songs.--Dom497 (talk) 12:00, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry but I read through the documentation page of the {{Track listing}} template and it didn't talked any about refs (on how to put it at the top of the No. section). Maybe it's just OK to leave it as is because the examples at the documentation also don't have sources meaning that it is not necessary. I think.
I didn't realize that the list was from a template. Either way, I would still like to see a ref for the list as how would a reader (like me) know that those are all the songs included or even if a song included in that list really isn't part of the soundtrack? You can add something like this at the bottom of the list (after the template): <small>Source: ''ref goes here''</small>.--Dom497 (talk) 15:46, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 Added! :)
What makes refs, 11, 12, 13, 15, 20 (by the way, the "S" is missing in the title), and 25 reliable?--Dom497 (talk) 20:38, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
I don't think I should explain this to you as these are accepted. Fred Entertainment is a pop-culture website and I think it's reliable enough with Kenneth Plume conducting the interview in the Ref. TVShowsOnDVD.com is a site for news about new releases on DVDs. AllMusic is an online music guide that features album reviews, etc.... this may not sound reliable but look at Rotten Tomatoes that is merely used for film reviews in WP articles.
When it comes to reviews, that's a different situation. Review refs don't neccessarly have to "reliable" as they are what the public thinks of the topic. Either way, I'll let it go.--Dom497 (talk) 11:54, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
Article will be on hold for 7 days.--Dom497 (talk) 20:38, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Dom497 for the review. I hope everything will be sorted out and I surely hope this could pass your and the GA criteria. I think it's OK in the meantime but if you want to address more concerns, please don't hesitate. Thanks and have a nice day! Cheers! :) Mediran (t • c) 10:14, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Best Day Ever. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.newsday.com/entertainment/ny-fffast4956134nov05%2C0%2C4012699.story?coll=ny-entertainment-promo
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131203060155/http://www.multichannel.com/content/nick%E2%80%99s-ascheim-viewers-love-be-programmers/114476 to http://www.multichannel.com/content/nick%E2%80%99s-ascheim-viewers-love-be-programmers/114476
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131203004146/http://www.zap2it.com/tv/zap-spongebobsquarepantsnickratingsbestever%2C0%2C7562637.story to http://www.zap2it.com/tv/zap-spongebobsquarepantsnickratingsbestever%2C0%2C7562637.story
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:34, 18 June 2017 (UTC)