# Talk:Male Unbonding

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)

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)

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.
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: 

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: 

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

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

Overall:
Pass or Fail: 


### 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:
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.
The third paragraph in the production section contains five consecutive sentences that start with the.
The last three sentences of the Production section would be more appropriate in the second paragraph.
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.
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)

The DVD titles this Male-Unbonding, which a hyphen. Should this be renamed? – kentyman (talk) 03:28, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Male Unbonding. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080418075527/http://www.tvdvdreviews.com/seinfeld1.html to http://www.tvdvdreviews.com/seinfeld1.html
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) 05:37, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Male Unbonding. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080315205758/http://www.sonypictures.com/tv/shows/seinfeld/dvd/?sl=browse_by_season&tab=overview&season=1 to http://www.sonypictures.com/tv/shows/seinfeld/dvd/?sl=browse_by_season&tab=overview&season=1
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) 23:01, 18 June 2017 (UTC)