# Talk:Floyd (30 Rock)

I changed the link for John Lutz from the mystery novelist to the television writer and actor. Yes, an obviously constructive edit, but just to stay on the safe side: NBC is a client of my employer; I just came across this in my own reading, and figured I would make this change. NMS Bill (talk) 15:09, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Floyd (30 Rock)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: BelovedFreak 21:27, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

It's worth stating here that I have never seen 30 Rock, which I think is an advantage when reviewing an article like this, as hopefully I can identify any points that may need clarifying for the uninitiated.
No dead links or links to disambiguation pages.
GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS): 
fairly well written, just a few prose issues to be sorted
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
just a couple of citations missing for quotes
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
no problems here
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 
fair and neutral
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 
no problems here
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): 
no problems here
Overall:
Pass/Fail: 


### Prose
#### Lead
"originally aired on the National Broadcasting Company (NBC)" → originally aired on the National Broadcasting Company (NBC) network; to clarify that it aired on a network, not a company
Done. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 14:36, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
"Liz Lemon's (Tina Fey) ex-boyfriend, Floyd DeBarber (Sudeikis), returns with big news" - it's not clear what he's returning from and the way this is written, my interest is piqued. This is not expanded on in the plot (although it is clearer there). Even just "returns to New York" would make the context a little clearer.
I think I got it.
It's not clear what TGS with Tracy Jordan is, at first I thought maybe it was a rival show to the one the characters work on, on reading 30 Rock, I gather it's the show that they work on. I don't expect you to go into too much detail, being an article just on the episode, but could you add an introductory sentence somewhere? Maybe that first paragraph? Just to give a little context so that readers don't have to go and read the main article straight away to understand this one. As someone who hasn't seen the show before, I don't really know what it's about & I had to pick up clues along the way, and then read the main article. It's not unreasonable to presume that a reader may end up on this article without having seen the show before.
Added that it's a fictitious show, hope that helps.


#### Plot
"... jealous of the publicity that Danny Baker (Cheyenne Jackson) is getting" - why is he getting publicity? My interest is piqued, but I don't find out. Is this from a previous episode?
Added bit, hope it helps.
"Frank realizes he can use this to manipulate him, which successfully works." - "successfully works" is redundant. Suggest "which is successful" or "which works".
Done.
"to keep Jenna and Tracy distracted from Danny's fanfare, Pete has them taking a plaster face-print..." - this doesn't sound quite right. I'm not sure if it's ungrammatical or just a little informal. Could it be Pete asks them to take a plaster face-print... or something similar?
Well, he doesn't ask them, he just tells them.
Whose face are they taking a face print of?
Tracy and Jenna.
"...and in order for them not to continue having them, the two decide..." - this is a little unwieldy. Could this be reworded? I think a few of those words could be cut. Something like Jenna and Tracy are plagued by erotic dreams involving Kenneth, and to stop having them, they decide to stay awake
Done.
"a la" → à la
Done.
"...they decide to deal with it a la A Nightmare on Elm Street, in which they plan to kill Kenneth ..." - "in which" is not quite right here. This is the first of several "in which"s that are not quite right. Here, "in which" is referring to the film. they decide to deal with it à la A Nightmare on Elm Street, and plan to kill Kenneth in their dreams or even simpler: they decide to deal with it à la A Nightmare on Elm Street, by killing Kenneth in their dreams
Done.
"The two wake up "in their dream" and attack Kenneth." - not 100% clear. Do you mean that they believe they are still dreaming but are still awake?
They believe that they are "in their dream" but really they're awake.
"the two decide not to fall asleep" is followed shortly by "The two wake up" - quick repetition of "the two" would be better avoided.
Removed.
"They apologize to Kenneth for attacking him, in which he accepts their apology." - "in which" is misplaced here
Removed.


#### Production
"This episode was Pell's first writing credit and second directed episode for Shelton, having directed ..." - this is not quite right; "having" refers to the subject (the episode) rather than Shelton. So, something like and second directed episode for Shelton who had directed the March 26... If you could replace one of the "directed"s with a synonym to avoid that direct repetition, that would be even better!
Done, and do you have a suggestion for one of the "directed"s? Nothing is coming up.
"This episode originally aired in the United States..." - as you've just mentioned another episode, this is slightly ambiguous; it might be worth naming the episode here.
Done.
"This was Sudeikis's tenth appearance...f  This was actor Cheyenne Jackson's..." - quick repetition of "this was" sounds awkward
Fixed.
"Series creator, executive producer and lead actress Tina Fey was the head writer on SNL from 1999 until 2006" - this seems a slightly out of context, especially as, until I read the main show article, I didn't know that SNL had anything to do with it. I'm not sure what to suggest here really, but could you give this paragraph another read over? I won't insist on you changing it, but tightening it up would be somthing to think about post-GA.
I think I got it.
Were the Today Show people playing themselves? I presume so, but would be nice to clarify that.
Yes, they were.
Accoeding to the Today (NBC program) article, it seems that it's either known as Today or The Today Show; not the Today show.
Done.
"He turns on the television in which Holt reports..." - again, "in which" is out of place here. Holt isn't reporting in the television. Try He turns on the television to see Holt who reports... - or something.
Done.
"Liz makes reference that once on television one could not say the word "crap"" - as it stands, this is ambiguous and at first I read it to mean that once you got on television, you couldn't say "crap". Liz makes reference to the fact that once, on television, one could not say the word "crap"
Done.
"the comic book superhero team, the X-Men, in which they are rejected" → the comic book superhero team, the X-Men, who are rejected
Done.
"This is a reference to Judah Friedlander, who portrays Frank in the show, who is known for his trademark trucker hats ..." → This is a reference to Judah Friedlander, who portrays Frank in the show and who is known for his trademark trucker hats or This is a reference toactor Judah Friedlander, (Frank) who is known for his trademark trucker hats
Done.
"which he wears in and out of the Frank character." → which he wears in and out of character.
Done.
"When Liz tells Floyd that she saw him on the Today show, in which she learned he is getting married" - "in which" should be "on which" or "from which"
Done.
"This references the Nightmare on Elm Street film series," - I think there should be an "A" in front of Nightmare. Consider extending the link to encompass "film series" as that's what you're linking to, otherwise it looks like a repeat of the previous link. (By the way, in this sentence "in which" is fine!)
Done, and I do apologize for the "in which", I'll admit that my grammar is not all that great.


#### Reception
"citing that it was a disappointing episode" - he's not exactly citing there. I'd go for "saying" or "calling it"
Done.
"said that when Floyd called Liz a "badger" that her heart broke into smithereen" - one too many "that"s
Consistency.
"gave a positive review to both Liz and Jack's plot" - "to" isn't right here - "of"?
Done.
"these four seasons, [Floyd's] the one she should end up with" - since "Floyd's" are your words, should be "Floyd is". Or, perhaps put the brackets just around "Floyd" so  that it's "...seasons, [Floyd]'s the one..."
Done.
"As with Sassone, Time  contributor James Poniewozik said" →Like Sassone, Time  contributor James Poniewozik said
Done.


### MoS
#### Plot
Is there any likelihood that an article will be created about Kristin McGee? A quick look at her IMDb page suggests that she may not be notable enough for an article. If that's the case then you might as well delink the name.
Removed links.


#### References
Many of these references would benefit from including publishers.

no. 1; Internet Movie Database needs to be spelled out, and linked to its article
Done.
no. 5; NBC Universal Media Village - should this be in italics?
Removed italics.
no. 15; the Daily News link needs piping
Done.
no. 16; NBC UNiveresal doesn't need linking as it has already been linked in no. 5
Like above.
no. 22; the title in the reference doesn't match the title on the website
Fixed.
no. 26; IGN doesn't need to be linked as it's linked at no. 12
Removed.
no. 29; TV Guide is already linked previously so doesn't need a link here.
Removed.


### Factually accurate / verifiable
According to Wikipedia:Citing sources#When quoting someone: "You should always add a citation when quoting published material ... either directly after the quotation ... or after a sentence or phrase that introduces the quotation." I see two quote missing cites directly after the sentence; the one beginning "He reported that he felt bad for Liz "because of all the guys..." and the one beginning "Television columnist Alan Sepinwall for The Star-Ledger commented that Sudeikis's return ..."
Done.


### On hold
This is a well written article that's very close to GA; just a few prose and MoS issues to iron out. I'm putting the article on hold for 7 days.--BelovedFreak 22:40, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I believe I've addressed your concerns, if not I'll continue work. Thanks for the review, I appreciate it. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 15:21, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Ok, just two things I want to query. I'll put them here so you can consider all of the above dealt with.
The face-print thing. I'm not sure if I'm just being stupid, but I still don't really get it! Are they just literally taking a plaster cast of their faces, or does it have some other meaning? If it is just that, could you say a plaster face-print or themselves, just so it's clear that they're not taking it of Kenneth or Pete.
Maybe this will help ---> "Out in the hall, Pete finds Kenneth to tell him they need to keep Tracy and Jenna occupied all day so they don't see Danny's profile [New York Times], get jealous, and act out like children. He says he's going to send them to makeup to get plaster casts of their faces made.""Floyd" recap --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:15, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
"This episode was Pell's first writing credit and second directed episode for Shelton who had directed..." - does Shelton have any previous non-directing credits on the series? If not, you could just miss out one of the "directed"s all together: This episode was Pell's first writing credit and the second episode for Shelton who had directed... If she does have another part in the show, then maybe you could replace the second "directed" with something like "helmed"? Not the best word, but acceptable.
Shelton directed "Apollo, Apollo" and "Floyd", just those two for the series. She's just a director. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:15, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Apart from those two, that'll be it! --BelovedFreak 15:54, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Ok, that's great. I've tweaked the sentence about the face prints to better help my understanding, feel free to edit that further based no your knowledge, but it's clearer to me now anyway! Don't worry about your grammar, it's really pretty well written (that's coming from someone not so good at grammar either!); it's just I kept noticing those "in which"s! If you're going to develop this further, I'd recommend getting a copyedit from someone who knows what they're talking about in that department! So, I'll pass this now. Thanks for making the changes and congratulations on another GA on what seems like a very long list! If you found my review reasonable, I'd be happy to go and look at another of your nominations. (Especially now I know a little more about 30 Rock!) regards, --BelovedFreak 16:22, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
It's fine, your tweak makes sense, and should for the other readers. :) Thanks, and I'll definitely enlist the help from a copy-editor. No no, thank you for taking time from your busy schedule to review this article. ;) If you have the time to look over another 30 Rock article, be my guest. :P --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:28, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Floyd (30 Rock). 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/20120311025037/https://www.nbcumv.com/images/thumbnails/2010/3/NUP_138630/NUP_138630_0056.jpg to https://www.nbcumv.com/images/thumbnails/2010/3/NUP_138630/NUP_138630_0056.jpg
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120311025033/https://www.nbcumv.com/images/thumbnails/2010/3/NUP_138730/NUP_138730_0054.jpg to https://www.nbcumv.com/images/thumbnails/2010/3/NUP_138730/NUP_138730_0054.jpg
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100129204653/http://www.televisionwithoutpity.com/show/30_rock/winter_madness_1.php?page=3 to http://www.televisionwithoutpity.com/show/30_rock/winter_madness_1.php?page=3
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100405013744/http://www.televisionwithoutpity.com/show/30_rock/floyd_1.php?page=6 to http://www.televisionwithoutpity.com/show/30_rock/floyd_1.php?page=6
Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5xVQsUsNN?url=http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2010/03/26/broadcast-finals-greys-anatomy-community-parks-rec-vampire-diaries-adjusted-up/46211 to http://tvbythenumbers.com/2010/03/26/broadcast-finals-greys-anatomy-community-parks-rec-vampire-diaries-adjusted-up/46211
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100329114009/http://www.tvguide.com/Episode-Recaps/30-rock/30-Rock-Episode-1016678.aspx to http://www.tvguide.com/episode-recaps/30-rock/30-rock-episode-1016678.aspx
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) 21:44, 18 June 2017 (UTC)