Talk:Small Victories

Small Victories has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 23, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed

Television: Episode coverage / Stargate Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Stargate task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Science Fiction Low‑importance

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Small Victories/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Looks good, with only a few minor issues:

Not a big deal by any means, but it was my understanding that "season" isn't a proper noun (thus "season 4"/3 uncapitalised) - it's not mentioned at WP:MOSTV but see article titles such as Lost (season 4) or Smallville (season 1). I think a few season pages were moved a while ago in accordance with this... but, as I said, not a big deal either way.
Should the actors' names be integrated through the plot, do you think? Certainly makes it easier when reading down the article when actors are referred to and readers are expected to know who's who! ;)
the major CGI (Computer-generated imagery) moments - maybe "Computer-generated imagery (CGI)"?
the few big-VisFX-budget episodes - any reason why this doesn't just spell out "visual effects"?
What was the outcome of the Emmy nomination?
One anecdotal blooper moment ... is how during the filming of a Thor scene, the puppeteers raised Thor's hand to touch Taping's behind - "Tapping", double P? And is "how" the right word here? Seems kind of badly worded; maybe play around with that one. Also, does this belong under reception rather than production?

Otherwise, everything is looking WP:GOOD. I'll put this one on hold - it should be fairly easy to fix/answer these little issues, so good luck! —97198 (talk) 11:16, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have addressed your comments.[1] I may not have been able to satisfy your last point, but then again I could never make that sentence work anywhere before. (I'd be reluctant to lose it though.) – sgeureka ^t•c 23:22, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, everything (including that sentence) looks good - I'll go and make it official. :) —97198 (talk) 07:58, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]