# Talk:Humbug (The X-Files)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Humbug (The X-Files)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

Having read the article I was left wondering where the episode's title came from. Also, I note that the reception section seems generally positive; given that the episode was nominated for awards it was probably well received, but I just want to double check that there aren't important negative opinions missing. Otherwise, it seems to cover the main points and satisfy criterion 3.

The title is actually spoken during the episode, referring to Barnum's use of the Feejee mermaid. I can't find anything actually saying that that's what the episode is named after. They could have named the episode after the script was written, or just worked the title into the dialogue. It's not in the official guide, and there's no dvd commentary. I could maybe work it into the plot, what do you think?
No need. If the sources don't go into it, there's not much that can be done really. Plus if a reader's curious, they can search for humbug and put 2 and 2 together. Nev1 (talk) 22:30, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
In revisiting one of the sources to address your concern below, I found that it did actually mention this. Although it's not directly from the horse's mouth that that's how the title evolved, the secondary source mentions that the title is "a reference to the machinations of P. T. Barnum..." - so, I've mentioned it in the plot.--BelovedFreak 14:13, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
I would actually be surprised if there were no negative reviews at all, since it was such a different episode from the ones that came before, but I've not been able to find any. I will keep looking though.
Fair enough. There's no point in putting undue weight on a negative review (if there is one) if the majority are positive. Given the context, I'm happy that the reception section is balanced. Nev1 (talk) 22:30, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
The prose could use a little work in places:

"When Mulder asks after the welfare of The Conundrum, who looks unwell...": unwell repeated
I've reworded this, see what you think.--BelovedFreak 18:38, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
"By the time it was completed, Morgan's script turned out to be...": I'm not sure the bit before the comma is necessary. It seems a bit wordy and doesn't really add anything. It's logical that it would be the finished script that was considered the funniest episode.
Fixed.--BelovedFreak 18:38, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
In "Humbug", this is highlighted by Dr Blockhead's argument that the freaks add a richness to life that will be eliminated by genetic advancements when everyone will look like Mulder": I'm not sure "when everyone looks like Mulder" is necessary. Mulder was just used as an example by Dr Blockhead because that's who he was talking to, he didn't mean everyone would literally look like Mulder.
I comtemplated "when everyone will look the same" or "when everyone will look similar", but it seemed awkward, so I've removed that part of the sentence altogether.--BelovedFreak 10:59, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Why does Cox decide "Humbug" was a pivotal episode? This needs to be explained. Is it because it broke the mould of the series, or it helped with character development, or set up something later in the series. I think with a few tweaks the article will pass the GA criteria. Nev1 (talk) 23:55, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

I've tried to explain this a bit better. What I'd written before wasn't exactly right, and he doesn't use the word "pivotal", so I was actually changing the meaning there. See what you think. I don't know if I've actually made it worse or not, as I think I'm so familiar with the article now that i can't tell if I'm getting the point across effectively!--BelovedFreak 14:13, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

Ok, everything seems to be in order and I've listed this as a Good Article. Well done. Nev1 (talk) 17:47, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

While, in general, I'm not opposed to spoilers, to lead the article with an image that's such a blatant spoiler for the end of the episode... seems to be pushing the point. It would be nice if someone had a shot of The Enigma, whose guest appearance in this episode is certainly worth a visual nod. -Miskaton (talk) 19:34, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant to respond to this much earlier. That's a fair point, another image would be preferable to the one currently being used, so I'll remove it. To be honest, the article may not really need an image. I'll have a think and see if I can come up with anything that would be justifiable under WP:NFC, but there may not be anything. Otherwise, perhaps a free image of The Enigma would work. --BelovedFreak 13:37, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

There is a Tom Reamy story collected in San Diego Lightfoot Sue and other stories that seems very similar to Humbug, although I cannot remember the story's title. Is there a relationship? Mcguire (talk) 16:21, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Along with literally two dozen additional book references, here are some additional sources. Storing them here for safe keeping so I don't forget about them or lose track. Bruce Campbell (talk) 04:14, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Cited by Yahoo as one of the series 10 best episodes here
Cited as a runner-up for best of the series by Starpulse here
Brief praise from DVD Journal, cites the episode as "unforgettable"  
IGN names it amongst the top 3 episodes of the entire series here.