# Talk:Prom Queen (Glee)

It strikes me that there's more going on in this episode than usual, because a lot of plot lines are coming to a head. A lot is already left out, including dramatic moments like Quinn slapping Rachel, and setup moments like Sam asking Mercedes to dance with her dream words, revealed earlier to Rachel. I'm reluctant to cut any paragraphs; someone more ruthless than I needs to if this should indeed be shorter. (And if not, the edit note needs to come down.) BlueMoonset (talk) 14:46, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Prom Queen (Glee)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Rcej (talk • contribs • count) 02:28, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
Fine work! One of my fav episodes.. Rcej (Robert) – talk 09:13, 6 September 2011 (UTC) 

Thank you! Glad you liked it. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:58, 6 September 2011 (UTC)


### Results of review
GA review (see here for criteria)
The article Prom Queen (Glee) passes this review, and has been promoted to good article status. The article is found by the reviewing editor to be deserving of good article status based on the following criteria:
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 

It is broad in its coverage.
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: Pass

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Prom Queen (Glee). 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/20110905043553/http://www.bbm.ca/_documents/top_30_tv_programs_english/2011/nat05092011.pdf to http://bbm.ca/_documents/top_30_tv_programs_english/2011/nat05092011.pdf
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110528031436/http://new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/chart_watch/74366/week-ending-may-15-2011-songs-idol-boosts-tyler/ to http://new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/chart_watch/74366/week-ending-may-15-2011-songs-idol-boosts-tyler/
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) 00:04, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Cpotisch added both the {{Tone}} and {{Copy edit}} templates to the article, along with making a number of other edits to it. I have reverted the punctuation changes, since they violate the logical quotation standard in the manual of style, and reviewed the other changes, modifying a few and leaving others.
In my judgment after checking and editing the article, there is nothing left requiring a copyedit and have removed the related template, though if Cpotisch disagrees I am happy to request a copyedit directly from the Guild of Copy Editors. I am not at all clear why a Tone template has been added, and would welcome their comment here on the specific places where the tone is deemed inappropriate. (If tone does turn out to be an issue, then I will definitely request said copyedit from the Guild, as they are well able to deal with such issues.) Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:24, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Eleven months later, there has been no response; I am removing the Tone template as being problematic, given there were also issues with the copyedit. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:38, 27 January 2022 (UTC)