Jump to content

Talk:Lottery Fever/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 14:06, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll offer a review shortly. J Milburn (talk) 14:06, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say that this episode is only borderline notable, even though it's a season premiere. That said, the writing's not too bad, and the referencing is reasonable. With a little cleanup, this is probably going to be as ready as it could ever be for GA status. J Milburn (talk) 14:32, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, looking through the article again, I'm still not really convinced that this is ready for good article status.

  • "After collecting the money, the family are unable to decide how they should spend all the money" Repetition
  • "After Peter agrees to invest in Quagmire's projects, involving penis enhancement, Peter demands that he and Joe hang out with him in order to pay him back, and perform random tasks (including Joe asking for Stevie Nicks to play three songs for Bonnie)." Unclear. Trivial details?
  • "Peter discovers his credit card got declined" This is no better than it was.
  • I'm still not seeing why the "cultural references" are in any way significant
  • The "production" section contains precious little actually about the production.
  • In terms of secondary sources, we're seemingly limited to two reviews from borderline reliable sources, and two very short newspaper articles presumably based on "WE'VE GOT A NEW SERIES" press releases. This is a long way from ideal.

While I certainly think that decent articles can be written about episodes and/or topics of limited notability, I am not convinced that this article is a strong example. For that reason, I am going to close the review at this time. I think I'd really want to see more sources before this could be promoted- try checking some archives/contacting a user with access to them, or, if all else fails, wait; the episode could well be mentioned in future articles on Family Guy, or discussed in books about the show. I hope you do not feel that I have treated this article unfairly. J Milburn (talk) 21:10, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]