Talk:Lottery Fever

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Eduard Khil?

Eduard Khil didn't actually do his own voice, did he? I thought that was Mike Henry. --RThompson82 (talk) 10:48, 24 May 2012 (UTC) Think so too. He wasn't even credited, if he would be. -- 93.217.241.19 (talk) 20:02, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

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

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]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lottery Fever. 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:

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) 07:30, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]