# Talk:The Fabian Strategy

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Fabian Strategy/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: BelovedFreak 18:01, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

No links to disambiguation pages
Checklinks tool is showing two dead links, both from the Hollywood Reporter (currently refs nos. 3 & 32) : [1] and [2]
Both sources have been replaced. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:10, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
Citations look good. A few queries about reliability below.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 
Article is well-balanced, fair and neutral.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 
no problems with stability
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): 
Images are free and have appropriate licenses
Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

I've had a quick read through and it looks pretty good so far. I've done some copyediting so, as usual, please check that I haven't inadvertently changed the meaning, and that you're happy with my changes. Initial thoughts:
Lead

"Tracy ... has trouble coming to grips with Kenneth..." - I didn't change this because I wasn't sure if it is ok in US English, but should this be "getting to grips with", or "coming to terms with"? Doesn't sound right as it is to me.
Fixed. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:58, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
This hadn't changed. I presume you meant to by your comment, so I've gone ahead and changed it to coming to terms with. Fee free to change if you don't like it! BelovedFreak 11:23, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Plot

I'm concerned that the plot summary is a little too long. It felt a bit too long as I read it, and at roughly 700 words, it's longer than is recommended at WP:MOSTV#Plot section which suggests 200–500 words. Can you cut it down anywhere? I thought perhaps the first paragraph could be cut down a bit. For example, I don't think we need to know why they need to make budget cuts, it doesn't add much to the understanding of the story. Also, I'm not sure that you need to detail the firing of the wardrobe woman. The main points are that they needed to make budget cuts, that Jenna became a producer (and say why) and that she realized they'd be better off if they fired her. That's just the first paragraph, I wonder if maybe the other plot details could be tightened up a bit too.
I did my best.
Ok, I've hacked a way at it and reduced it a bit more. See what you think. I don't think I've cut anything too vital, but I haven't seen the episode so you may disagree. --BelovedFreak 19:57, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Cultural References

"...a reference to an upcoming episode of 30 Rock that will be broadcast live on October 14, 2010." - I presume this episode has now been broadcast and this sentence can be updated.
Done.
"She reveals that she is imitating her life as chef Ina Garten..." - this doesn't sound right, but I'm not completely sure what you mean. Is she imitating Ina Garten? Modeling her life on that of Ina Garten?
Yes, she's modeling the life of Garten.
Ok, I edited that slightly as it didn't read right to me.BelovedFreak 11:23, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
I'm slightly confused about the Muppet reference. Is their favourite thing muppets? Or specifically, Muppets presenting award shows? I'm not sure "include" is in the right place there.
Do you want me to remove it?
No, I think it's fine to have it in there, but I find the wording a little awkward. Hmm, how about something like Liz and Carol discover that one of the things they have in common is that they both love to watch The Muppets presenting award shows. Is that what you mean? That's not great, but if that's what you mean, it's a little clearer. To be honest, I don't think you need to explain what the Muppets are. I think most readers will be familiar, and you've linked it. BelovedFreak 11:23, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Done. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:03, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
I'm not 100% sure that the Life Alert necklace thing should be there as a cultural reference. I don't know... feel free to disagree, but I'm not sure it should be there.
It's always mentioned in other television shows; mocking it, really.
Ok, I don't feel strongly about it. :) BelovedFreak 11:23, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
I'll remove it if you want, I mean it's a "popular" thing that people like to make fun of, but if  you feel it doesn't belong I'll have no problem removing it from the section. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:03, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
Don't worry about it. If it's something that is referenced by other TV shows, I guess it makes sense to have it in there.
I'll probably have a couple more questions about the prose, and I haven't gone through the references yet.--BelovedFreak 20:45, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
Sources

Could you talk me through the following sources re reliability:
Hitfix/Alan Sepinwall
Alan Sepinwall used to write for The Star-Ledger but now he works at HitFix.
Ok. BelovedFreak 11:23, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
The DePaulia/Darla Weaver
The DePaulia is a college newspaper.
So, is that reliable? I don't know what college newspapers are like in the US, but here, I'd imagine most of them to be run by students, and frankly, not that reliable. BelovedFreak 11:23, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Source has been replaced. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:03, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
The Perpetual Post/Howard Megdal/Zoe Rice
Removed The Perpetual Post.
Ok BelovedFreak 11:23, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Ok, that's it for now. Good work. I'll put it on hold for you to address the issues and give it a final once-over when you're done.--BelovedFreak 20:15, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the review, BF, appreciate it very much. If there's anything else you have concern with, please let me know. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:03, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for working on this. I'm happy to list the article as a GA now. As noted above, I've cut down the plot a little so see what you think. If it's too drastic, feel free to revert, it won't impinge on me passing the article, I just think it was a bit long before. Good work! --BelovedFreak 19:57, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on The Fabian Strategy. 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/20100528112310/http://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/2009/01/tina_fey200901?currentPage=2 to http://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/2009/01/tina_fey200901?currentPage=2
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) 19:47, 20 April 2017 (UTC)