Talk:Bo Burnham: Inside/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Some Dude From North Carolina (talk · contribs) 02:34, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Hey, I'm going to be reviewing this article. Expect comments by the end of the week. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 02:34, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Infobox and lead

• Infobox looks good (but I think Josh Senior might need a source).
  • Added (end credits of the show suffice). — Bilorv (talk) 16:48, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
• "about his day-to-day life indoors [...] taking photos for Instagram" (was that song about him?)
  • Yeah, now I tried to word this so it didn't imply that he was the one doing the "activities on the internet", but I can see how that's not come across. How does the reworded first paragraph look? — Bilorv (talk) 16:48, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Looks good. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 17:48, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

• In the second lead paragraph, add a WP:DATECOMMA after May 30, 2021.
• Serial comma after "stand-up comedy".

Background

• "Burnham begun to have" → "Burnham began to have"
• Make a WP:CITEBUNDLE with the four sources after "Make Happy (2016)"
• Link panic attacks in #Background and remove the link in #Synopsis.
• "in [his] guest house, in his home in Los Angeles" sounds like two places. Reword.
  • Is it better as filmed in Burnham's guest house, inside his Los Angeles home? — Bilorv (talk) 16:48, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 17:48, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Synopsis and album

• This section is 693 words so that passes WP:FILMPLOT.
• The second sentence repeats "the special" twice. Reword to avoid wordiness.
• Remove the comma after "he does not want to finish the special".
• #Album looks good but the track listing needs a source.

Analysis

• "analysed" → "analyzed" (American English for all uses)
  • Damn, I tried to purge the British English in me for the article but forgot this one. — Bilorv (talk) 16:48, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
• "and the subsequent reaction video is" → "and the subsequent reaction video are"
  • Do you think it's okay as The song "Unpaid Intern" and subsequent reaction video is... (no second "the", so only one article)? It's not that they're both similar to Mr. Show individually, but collectively. — Bilorv (talk) 16:48, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes that works. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 17:49, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

• Change "(1995–8)" to "(1995–1998)" per MOS:YEARRANGE.
• Change uses of "..." to "[...]" (more visually appealing).
  • My understanding of MOS:ELLIPSIS is that this is only preferred when there is ambiguity over whether the ellipsis is in-quote or added by us. — Bilorv (talk) 16:48, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
• Link claustrophobia here and remove the link in #Reception.
  • Good catch: done. — Bilorv (talk) 19:21, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Reception and references

• Updated Rotten Tomatoes.
  • I see, a new review since yesterday. The only major change will be if this drops off 100%, which is perfectly possible. — Bilorv (talk) 16:48, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
• Paraphrase – WP:RECEPTION.
  • I've gone through another round of copyediting, trying to reduce the length and number of quotes while maintaining the same exactness to the original sources. — Bilorv (talk) 16:48, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
• Archive sources.
  • IABot wasn't working last night, but it worked this time. — Bilorv (talk) 16:48, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
• #5 (The Gazette) is dead.
• Mark Rolling Stone w/ "|url-access=limited".

Progress

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): 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:
· · ·

Thanks for the review! Very speedy. I've implemented all of these, or at least made a first attempt, and replied with comments to a few as well. — Bilorv (talk) 16:48, 12 June 2021 (UTC)