Talk:All Hell Breaks Loose (Charmed)/GA1 - Wikipedia


2 people in discussion

Article Images

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

Nominator: PanagiotisZois (talk · contribs) 20:33, 29 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Reviewer: FishLoveHam (talk · contribs) 20:23, 4 October 2024 (UTC)Reply


Hi! I'll conduct this review   FishLoveHam (talk) 20:23, 4 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

  • "The episode was originally broadcast in the United States on May 17, 2001, on The WB. Written by Brad Kern and directed by Shannen Doherty, "All Hell Breaks Loose" originally aired on The WB on May 17, 2001." Why is this information repeated?
  • "of all time" sounds a little in-universe-y, maybe try "the show's most powerful witches" or something.
  • "coming out into the public" clunky, reword.
  • Remove the comma before "...when Prue and Piper are caught..." and replace "when" with "after".
  • "among" → "one of".
  • This plot section is very long for a TV episode, at over 800 words. Wikipedia suggests no more than 400 words for a singular television episode.
  • "personal assassin" → "assassin"
  • "find out more information" → "learn more"
  • "vanquishing spell" → "a vanquishing spell".
  • "At the news station, Elana (Mercedes Colón) shows her crew the footage Prue and Piper vanquishing Shax" missing "of".
  • "He arrives at the manor, and tells them they could be arrested because they killed someone on live television." remove comma.
  • "to figure out where Shax went" → "in search of Shax".
  • "blows him up" reads informally.
  • "Back at the manor" Remove, the previous sentence establishes they are there.
  • Introduce Cole.
  • "come after him" → "follow him".
  • "wo secretly tells his hit-man" → "who secretly tells his hit-man".
  • "the point" → "when".
  • Remove the comma after "window".
  • Remove the comma after "who attacks them".
  • "Phoebe finds Cole and asks him to come back to the manor"; "come back" → "return".
  • Remove "named".
  • "Cole's help in getting"; remove "in".
  • "Cole ask the Source"; "ask" → "asks".
  • "under the condition Phoebe join the dark side"; "condition Phoebe join" → "condition of Phoebe joining"
  • Change the quote from "the rough cut for" to "the rough cut" for.
  • "when" → "after".
  • "lived" → "lives".
  • "kill-off" → "kill off" (same with image caption)
  • "gave everyone options about what they were or were not going to do" explain this a bit more.
  • "not left" → "remained on".
  • "in a different manner" → "differently".

@FishLoveHam: In the TV Line source, the following is described:

"Season 3's Kern-penned finale, which ended with all three sisters in mortal danger, "gave everyone options about what they were or were not going to do", he explains. "As an executive producer, my job was to put out a compelling finale. So the cliffhanger ending that would eventually launch us into our fourth season was something I'd been planning on doing no matter what. If the network were to say 'You're keeping your entire cast', I simply would have written a way out of it in Season 4."

Admittedly, Kern doesn't exactly say in this section of the source that the Doherty-Milano feud is what resulted in Doherty's departure and Prue's death. I guess when he says that a cliffhanger ending "gave everyone options about what they were or were not going to do", he was most likely referring to the actresses and/or producers. That whether the Charmed actresses chose to leave or stay, or whether the show's producers took it upon themselves to keep all three of them or fire one of them—which they did—all outcomes could be accomodated by this episode's ending.--PanagiotisZois (talk) 15:16, 8 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Can't this be explained in the article itself? FishLoveHam (talk) 15:27, 8 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
  • "prime time" → "prime-time".
  • "time period" → "period" or "time".
  • Ref 1 says "pp. 152–53" change to "pp. 152–153" for clarity.
  • Sources are archived  
Spot-check
  • [1]  
  • [4]  
  • [6] a.   b.   c.  
  • [9]  
  • [11]  
  • [14]  
  • [16]  
  • [19]  
  • Images:  
  • Broad & summary style: Overly long plot
  • Neutral:  
  • No OR/COPYVIO:   18% Earwig
  • Stable:  
GA review
(see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
    a (references):  
    b (citations to reliable sources):  
    c (OR):  
    d (copyvio and plagiarism):  
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):  
    b (focused):  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  6. 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:  

  ·   ·   ·  

Thank you so much for picking up this review @FishLoveHam:! I'll try to address your comments as quickly as I can, but it might take me a couple of days.--PanagiotisZois (talk) 17:40, 5 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

No problem, take your time! :) FishLoveHam (talk) 17:52, 5 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
Hey @FishLoveHam:. I've made revision to the article. I've added one more source and some content, changed the infobox image, reworked the second-last sentence from the "Production" section, and trimmed down the plot synopsis. PanagiotisZois (talk) 14:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
The new infobox image's caption is quite long, can it be trimmed? FishLoveHam (talk) 22:00, 9 October 2024 (UTC)Reply