Revision as of 14:36, 23 September 2017 editInternetArchiveBot (talk | contribs)Bots, Pending changes reviewers5,380,274 edits Notification of altered sources needing review #IABot (v1.5.3) (FA RotBot)← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:02, 8 April 2021 edit undoHeartfox (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers17,522 edits →WP:URFA/2020 notes: new sectionNext edit → | ||
Line 81: | Line 81: | ||
Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 14:36, 23 September 2017 (UTC) | Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 14:36, 23 September 2017 (UTC) | ||
== ] notes == | |||
Reviewing for ]. | |||
* Does the lead need to be so choppy? I think it's okay to move the last sentence up and create a paragraph. It is not given who the Movementarians are; I assume they're the cult that takes over Springfield, but that should be given in the first sentence then. | |||
* It is not understood who Bart, Homer, or Marge are in the plot section. There's no wikilinks or descriptions of the characters (simple things like father, mother, son, etc.). What is the Forbidden Barn? We need some descriptions. "she finds Reverend Lovejoy, Ned Flanders, and Groundskeeper Willie"—are these townspeople? who are they? we shouldn't rely on links for everything. | |||
* Some of the cultural references could be integrated in to the production section. | |||
* The reception section is troubling. Most sentences never explain what the main view of the critic was, other than it was "highlighted". It is almost formatted like a list (but definitely shouldn't be). | |||
* FACTnet does not seem to be an appropriate source, nor a lesson plan. | |||
* fn 8 is missing page numbers. | |||
This seems to be an important episode and has specific sources that allow for a decent article. However, other parts such as the reception section are extremely lacking. It will need work to remain a ]. ] (]) 18:02, 8 April 2021 (UTC) |
Revision as of 18:02, 8 April 2021
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Joy of Sect article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
The Joy of Sect is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Misplaced Pages community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Joy of Sect is part of the The Simpsons (season 9) series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Misplaced Pages community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 30, 2010. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on The Joy of Sect. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120113051815/http://www.factnet.org/Scientology/celebcrit.html to http://www.factnet.org/Scientology/celebcrit.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150402115025/http://www.solitarytrees.net/racism/collar.htm to http://www.solitarytrees.net/racism/collar.htm
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140727053533/http://snpp.com/other/papers/jsh.paper.html to http://www.snpp.com/other/papers/jsh.paper.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111002094454/http://www.farmington.ac.uk/documents/new_reports/ME17.pdf to http://www.farmington.ac.uk/documents/new_reports/ME17.pdf
- Added archive https://archive.is/2013.01.27-151553/http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15405700701294111 to http://www.leaonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15405700701294111
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) 20:06, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on The Joy of Sect. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071107101018/http://www.avclub.com/content/feature/inventory_15_simpsons_moments/2 to http://www.avclub.com/content/feature/inventory_15_simpsons_moments/2
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) 14:36, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
WP:URFA/2020 notes
Reviewing for WP:URFA/2020.
- Does the lead need to be so choppy? I think it's okay to move the last sentence up and create a paragraph. It is not given who the Movementarians are; I assume they're the cult that takes over Springfield, but that should be given in the first sentence then.
- It is not understood who Bart, Homer, or Marge are in the plot section. There's no wikilinks or descriptions of the characters (simple things like father, mother, son, etc.). What is the Forbidden Barn? We need some descriptions. "she finds Reverend Lovejoy, Ned Flanders, and Groundskeeper Willie"—are these townspeople? who are they? we shouldn't rely on links for everything.
- Some of the cultural references could be integrated in to the production section.
- The reception section is troubling. Most sentences never explain what the main view of the critic was, other than it was "highlighted". It is almost formatted like a list (but definitely shouldn't be).
- FACTnet does not seem to be an appropriate source, nor a lesson plan.
- fn 8 is missing page numbers.
This seems to be an important episode and has specific sources that allow for a decent article. However, other parts such as the reception section are extremely lacking. It will need work to remain a featured article. Heartfox (talk) 18:02, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
Categories:- Misplaced Pages featured articles
- FA-Class Featured topics articles
- Misplaced Pages featured topics The Simpsons (season 9) featured content
- Low-importance Featured topics articles
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page once
- Old requests for peer review
- All unassessed articles
- FA-Class Animation articles
- Low-importance Animation articles
- FA-Class Animation articles of Low-importance
- FA-Class American animation articles
- Low-importance American animation articles
- American animation work group articles
- Animation articles used on portals
- WikiProject Animation articles
- Unassessed Comedy articles
- Unknown-importance Comedy articles
- WikiProject Comedy articles
- FA-Class Religion articles
- Low-importance Religion articles
- FA-Class New religious movements articles
- Low-importance New religious movements articles
- New religious movements articles
- WikiProject Religion articles
- FA-Class Scientology articles
- Low-importance Scientology articles
- WikiProject Scientology articles
- FA-Class television articles
- Low-importance television articles
- FA-Class Episode coverage articles
- Low-importance Episode coverage articles
- Episode coverage task force articles
- WikiProject Television articles
- FA-Class The Simpsons articles
- Mid-importance The Simpsons articles
- FA-Class The Simpsons articles of Mid-importance
- WikiProject The Simpsons articles