This peer review discussion has been closed.
- A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for December 2008.
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because although it's new I believe it is at or near Good Article status and wanted another set of eyes on it before making the nomination.
Thanks, Otto4711 (talk) 04:46, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Ruhrfisch comments: Very briefly, here are some suggestions for improvement. This looks very good to me, I think it should do well at WP:GAN - these are mostly nitpicks.
- To provide context for the reader, would it make sense to add the year to the first sentence? I know the air date is given later in the lead, but I think adding the year earlier would help.
- Spell out abbreviations before their first use, so fix LGBT and BDSM (not sure if there are others). Most people will know what these mean, but not everyone will
- Is there more information available on its original airing? What kind of ratings did it get? What sort of initial critical response did it get? Did it ever air as a rerun (I guess not). Is it available on DVD? This kind of infdrmation is often included in television episode articles.
- When did this occur: Right-wing groups used copies of Gay Power, Gay Politics as fundraising tools until CBS forced them to stop. ?
- For NPOV, could a bit more on what the right wing groups said about the episode be added?
Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:22, 17 December 2008 (UTC)