# Talk:The War of the Simpsons

One of the plot points in Jean Renoir's 1945 film, "The Southerner" (usually thought of as his most successful American picture), involves a feud between the eponymous poor Southern farmer (or was it his children?) and a neighbor, over who will catch a giant catfish, "old Lead Pencil."  If I remember correctly, there may be some dispute in the film whether Lead Pencil really exists.  I had always assumed Renoir's giant catfish was one of the inspirations for General Sherman, but can't find any support for this theory at, e.g., SNPP's episode capsule.  Does anyone else agree? Kmbush40 11:19, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:The War of the Simpsons/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.
Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct: 
In the lead, "How rows out on the lake and catches his fish" is "How" supposed to be "Homer"?
 Done
Check.
B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation: 
In the Cultural references section, "The way Ned Flanders prepares the cocktails at the party is similar to actor Tom Cruise's bartending stunts in the film Cocktail" ---> "The way Ned Flanders prepares the cocktails at the party is similar to actor Tom Cruise's bartending stunts in the 1988 film Cocktail. "This sequence and the music in it are references to a scene in the film The Omen" ---> "This sequence and the music in it are references to a scene in the film The Omen (1976)", so that it can provide context for the reader.
 Not done The release dates are not mentioned in the references. Are you sure it's not considered original research to add them?
No, they shouldn't be original research. Besides, if the references don't include them, the link article itself will include it. It shouldn't be a problem. But, I won't hold it against you.
Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline: 

B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose): 

C. It contains no original research: 

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic: 

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style): 

Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each: 

Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute: 

Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content: 

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: 
No screenshot?
There is no screenshot available that passes WP:NFCC#8.
I was just wondering if there was one available.
Overall:
Pass or Fail: 
Not much to do. If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!
--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:23, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I have left some questions further up. Thanks for reviewing! :) TheLeftorium 11:58, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
I hope I've answered them and you're welcome for it. Thank you to Theleftorium for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:04, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! :) I added the release dates to the cultural references section (the reason I'm worried about adding original research is because of the opposing votes at my recently withdrawn RFA). TheLeftorium 22:12, 21 June 2009 (UTC)