# Talk:Tooms

In the trivia section, the writer refers to themselves in 3rd person. that aint right
Every X-Files episode is notable. X-Files is an important part of late 20th Century culture. Eugene Tooms is a very interesting character from an important and interesting series. While certainly not as notable as an article about the Vietnam War or Carbon, articles such as this provide interesting information, and removing this article lowers the chance of it further being expanded and improved with more references. It also would lower the bredth of information on Wikipedia, and this bredth of information on a wide variety of subjects makes Wikipedia such a valuable resource. -- James  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.169.219 (talk) 22:19, 20 September 2007 (UTC) 

I agree with James,I don't have any other sources of information other than the show itself so this place is useful.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.186.3.213 (talk) 02:23, 26 September 2007 (UTC) 

This review is transcluded from Talk:Tooms/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: ♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:20, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
Beginning read through.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:20, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Plot
"Further research on the skeleton reveals bite marks from Tooms." I thought you said no substantial evidence could prove it from Tooms? Perhaps changed to the first part to "initially no substantial evidence could prove it" so it doesn't seem out of place further down.
"When the old couple watching Tooms goes out "  - depart would be better.
"When the old couple watching Tooms goes out and Tooms is visited by Dr. Monte, he kills him and presumably consumes the final liver he needs before his thirty-year hibernation." Presumably? How do you know?♦
No mention of the "Mulder I think its bile"? Wasn't his nest preserved with bile or something. Perhaps mention this. Ah don't worry you mention this below.
Reception
Again the "Den of Geek" sources are dubious. If this is a RS and notable website why isn't there an article?♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:01, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to review this. I'll make the changes now, but as for the Den of Geek stuff, I did check WP:RSN before I added it, and found this discussion. The response there was that it was from a reputable magazine publisher, Dennis Publishing, and should be okay as a source. If that's not the case I can remove the content using it, as none of it is overly important. GRAPPLE X 16:31, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
Diff of  changes made. GRAPPLE X 16:35, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality: 
B. MoS compliance: 
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources: 
B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary: 
C. No original research: 
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects: 
B. Focused: 
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias: 
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc: 
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales: 
B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions: 
Overall:
Pass or Fail: 
Good job. You have picked up on the formula which works for these television episodes and provides an effective, focused article on it, even if relatively short. Even though some episodes can be very complex, you've developed a good ability to summarize it well without making it sound like the work of a fan going into unnecessary detail. Obviously this article would need a great amount of work if this is to ever become an FA, Tooms likely has more sources than most of the X files episodes I'd imagine but accessing them may not be possible. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:15, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Tooms. 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/20110829065615/http://www.ugo.com/tv/tv-serial-killers?page=3 to http://www.ugo.com/tv/tv-serial-killers?page=3
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) 01:18, 19 June 2017 (UTC)