# Talk:In Theory

This review is transcluded from Talk:In Theory (Star Trek: The Next Generation)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Midnightblueowl (talk · contribs) 18:58, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

This all looks pretty good, but I have a few points of possible improvement to put forward. Midnightblueowl (talk) 18:58, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

In the "Plot" section:
We don't mention that Data is an android; perhaps this is a point worth making? Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:07, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
There is a reference to "Captain Picard" but he hasn't been properly introduced in the main prose of the article, just the lede. Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:07, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Why do we give the names of most characters but then refer to "Commander Riker" as opposed to "Will Riker"? Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:07, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
The same can be said for "Chief O'Brian". Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:07, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
We use "Lt." here but perhaps it would be best to spell out "Lieutenant". Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:07, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
"sub-routine" then "subroutine". Standardise to one spelling. Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:07, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
In Production:
Jonathan Frakes is a duplink. Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:12, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
In Reception:
No need to have quotation marks around Jammer's Reviews if it is the name of a website. Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:12, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
"having Captain Picard pilot" - no need to call him "Captain" here. Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:12, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
I would really recommend preserving these links via a web archive, lest they become deadlinks at some point in the future. Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:15, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

@Midnightblueowl: Thanks for the review, I think I've addressed everything and added those archiveurls. Miyagawa (talk) 19:19, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
@Miyagawa: Another great piece of work. I'm happy to pass this now. Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:22, 6 August 2016 (UTC)