# Talk:Peter-assment

This review is transcluded from Talk:Peter-assment/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Grapple X (talk · contribs) 16:01, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality: 

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists: 
All grand. Gave a minor copy-edit but that's it sorted in terms of prose.
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources: 

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary: 

C. No original research: 
Not a problem with the citations.
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects: 

B. Focused: 
Given that you include some criticism of a joke in the episode, the actual scene should be mentioned in the plot summary or recapped along with the criticism. As is, it's pretty out of context.
I'm not sure what you are referring to. If you are referring to the Schiavo joke, it is mentioned in the first sentence of plot. Please explain. Gage (talk) 05:11, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Oh, that's it? I sort of assumed the joke would be more offensive than that. Ah well, guess we're complete then. GRAPPLE X 10:01, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias: 
Neutrality seems okay to me.
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc: 
History is stable.
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: 
The image of Fisher is commons, no problem there. The rationale for the screenshot seems a bit cursory and boilerplate, though. Try to specify why it's relevant to the episode in question, showing the episode's two main roles in a key plot point.
Removed. Gage (talk) 05:11, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Overall:
Pass or Fail: 
Just going to hold this one for now, shouldn't take long at all to fix the 3A and 6A issues there. GRAPPLE X 16:01, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
Concerns addressed, article's good to go. Well done! GRAPPLE X 10:01, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Peter-assment. 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/20110711021928/http://www.foxinflight.com/tv/15/ to http://www.foxinflight.com/tv/15/
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100322211548/http://tvbythenumbers.com/2010/03/15/tv-ratings-undercover-boss-beats-trumps-apprentice-sons-of-tucson-orphaned/44878 to http://tvbythenumbers.com/2010/03/15/tv-ratings-undercover-boss-beats-trumps-apprentice-sons-of-tucson-orphaned/44878
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) 23:50, 18 June 2017 (UTC)