Talk:A Parks and Recreation Special

A Parks and Recreation Special 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.
Review: May 17, 2021. (Reviewed version).

Comedy Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy 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.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

COVID-19 Low‑importance

	COVID-19 portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject COVID-19, a project to coordinate efforts to improve all COVID-19-related articles. If you would like to help, you are invited to join and to participate in project discussions.COVID-19Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19Template:WikiProject COVID-19COVID-19 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Television 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Interview with Schur

Here, as a potential ref for information to add. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 03:10, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:A Parks and Recreation Special/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Some Dude From North Carolina (talk · contribs) 20:01, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I'm going to be reviewing this article. Expect comments by the end of the week. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 20:01, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox and lead

Improve the non-free use rationale with this template.
Lead summarizes the entire article so that's good.

Plot

Under 400 words so that passes WP:TVPLOT.
"cancelled" → "canceled" (American English)

Production

Optional but some images would be nice.
"Afterwards" → "Afterward" (American English)
The writing credits for Aisha Muharrar, Matt Murray, and Jen Statsky need a source, so here's an article you can use.
The series finale → The series finale, "One Last Ride" (WP:EASTEREGG).
The source used used says England, so I wouldn't mention London without another reference.
The last quote in the ~~fourth~~ fifth paragraph is not mentioned in this article.

I can't find the first part of the quote in the source given so it might come from two sources. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 22:08, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Both quotes are in that source, but I had swapped the order, which probably caused the confusion. The issue should be fixed now. RunningTiger123 (talk) 22:38, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reception

This source says the ratings were "in line with the show's final season" not the "series finale" as stated in the article.
"3.33 million viewers with a 1.3 rating" → "3.38 million viewers with a 1.0 rating" (source used).
Use the "cite Rotten Tomatoes" and "cite Metacritic" templates for citations instead.
- The RT template won't work correctly for this special, and I'm not a fan of the Metacritic template because it omits quotation marks. Therefore, I've opted to keep the cite web templates for both. RunningTiger123 (talk) 21:52, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

Sources are archived.
Mark sources from Rolling Stone with "|url-access=limited".
- As far as I can tell, only the parts of rollingstone.com associated with print articles are paywalled; this article is free to access. RunningTiger123 (talk) 21:52, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@RunningTiger123: I got the paywall message on my computer so I would mark it. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 22:07, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Some Dude From North Carolina: Interesting. I was using private browsing, so maybe that messed with the paywall? At any rate, it's fixed now. RunningTiger123 (talk) 22:11, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Article is close to being passed now. There's just one small comment in #Production left. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 22:14, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mark sources from Time with "|url-access=limited".
Mark sources from Vanity Fair with "|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:
· · ·

@Some Dude From North Carolina: All issues should be fixed; I've left a few comments above. My apologies for not checking that the sources and article matched – I should have done a better job checking WP:V beforehand. RunningTiger123 (talk) 21:52, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]