# Talk:Walter Skinner

"He was married to Sharon Skinner, from whom he was divorced on March 7, 1996 after 17 years of marriage."
I don't think Walter was divorced from Sharon. On March 7th, he was asked to sign the papers, but didn't and later when his wife was at the hospital, he told her he will not. We can see it in the episode "Avatar" in the 3rd season.

I agree.  The X-Files Wiki says the same thing [1]--Tabun1015 23:06, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
So why not change this? Remove the comment? Chlorinekid 16:40, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

The article says that the reoccurring dream of an old woman is either from drug use or... a succubus. Maybe that's a bit of a stretch? 72.23.80.194 (talk) 02:08, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Walter Skinner/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
I shall be reviewing this page against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:43, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Quick fail criteria assessment

The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability.

The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.

There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including cleanup, wikify, NPOV, unreferenced or large numbers of fact, clarifyme, or similar tags.

The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.

The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.

No problems with quick fail criteria, on to main review. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:48, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


### Checking against GA criteria
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): 
Character arc:  It is unclear whether he is entirely independent in his actions or controlled by people such as the Cigarette Smoking Man in early episodes. In early episodes, the frequent presence of the Cigarette Smoking Man in Skinner's office suggested that Skinner was at least partially under his power. some duplication here, suggest combining into one sentence. I made a few minor copy-edits. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:06, 13 September 2009 (UTC) Y
b (MoS): 
There is a mixture of past and present tense in the lead, I suggest changing to past tense.  The lead does not fully summaris ethe article, especially the conceptual history and reception sections. Y
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): 
In the first nine references the wikification of the episode title makes these references to Wikipedia itself.  This could probably be solved by removing the wikilinks. Y
b (citations to reliable sources): 
Robin Mayhall's website is in itself not a RS. If the statements are introduced with something like in an interview with X-Files fan site host Robin Mayhall, Pileggi said.... I think that would be clearer. Y
c (OR): 

It is broad in its scope.
a (major aspects): 

b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars etc.: 

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): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 
Just a few points above.  On hold for seven days. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:06, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
OK, all sorted now, I am happy to list this as a Good Article, congratulations. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:43, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Fixed them. --TIAYN (talk) 16:33, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Although the article has passed GA, the reception section needs to be beefed up a lot. Currently there are no critical reviews of the character, which is one of the most important aspects of that section. Ophois (talk) 14:18, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

 Done, i found four reviews, but not much available. Maybe you'll have better luch than me? --TIAYN (talk) 21:56, 17 October 2009 (UTC)