Wikipedia:Peer review/Gomer Pyle, U.S.M.C./archive1

Gomer Pyle, U.S.M.C.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

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 January 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Gaw-leee, Sarge! First a Japanese singer whom almost all Western media dubs as Japan's answer to Madonna, then a Pokémon game whose target demographic is less than half my age, then this... Wow, I'm really moving up the appeals-to-the-lowest-common-denominator ladder, huh? Ah well, I suppose WP has enough FAs on highbrow media and hurricanes and U.S. highways no one's ever heard of. :P

Anyways, I'm aiming for FA, so any pushes in the right direction (especially concerning prose, as that does not seem to be my forte) would be much appreciated. Ink Runner (talk) 05:19, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton comments

I have made some small copyedits and have introduced some punctuation changes. I enjoyed the article, though Gomer Pyle never got shown over here; we relied on Sergeant Bilko repeats to inform us about the US military. A few points for your attention:-

Lead
- There is a concealed note in the edit window drawing attention to the title screen "Gomer Pyle USMC", not "Gomer Pyle U.S.M.C." The article title should be consistent with the title screen format.
  - Fixed. Ink Runner (talk) 03:05, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "sweet-but-naive" is a rather specific description, and should be given a source.
  - Fixed. Ink Runner (talk) 03:05, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "Because it never discussed the Vietnam War...and indeed focussed on the relationship between Gomer and Sergeant Carter, the show retained high ratings throughout its run." First, the "indeed" is unnecessary. Even so, the sentence seems unduly assertive; there must have been other factors relevant to the show's popularity—its comedic qualities, likeability of performers, etc. I'd like to see the sentence redrafted in slightly less absolute terms.
  - Hm? There's no "indeed" anywhere in the article...?
- It would be useful if CBS's "target demographic" could be briefly indicated here.
  - Fixed. Ink Runner (talk) 03:05, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

History
- "a one-shot character"; term needs explaining. A character appearing in a single story or episode? Please clarify
  - Replaced "intended to be a one-shot character" character with "intended to appear in one episode". Ink Runner (talk) 03:05, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The refrence string [6][7][8][9][10] seems a lot for two fairly short sentences. Are all necessary; can any be resited?
- A full stop is required after "Nielsen ratings" (new sentence follows)
  - Ah, how did I miss that? >_> Ink Runner (talk) 03:05, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- There is an awkward sentence with multiple parenthetical and bracket insertions, as well as a quotation, and some clunky repeats: "Frank Sutton (who played Sergeant Carter) also attributed the popularity of the show to the fact that it 'concentrated on two characters [Gomer and Sergeant Carter] who [stay] in character' and to the writing (noting that the plots came from the two characters' attributes)." This is very clumsy; a suggested rewrite: "Frank Sutton, who played Carter, also ascribed the show's popularity to its concentration on its two main characters, the plots being built around their respective attributes."
  - Changed to your suggestion. Ink Runner (talk) 22:29, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The next parenthetical insert should likewise be integrated with its main sentence, thus: "The program remained in the Top Ten of the ratings throughout its run—in the top three for all but its third season when CBS moved it..." etc
  - Changed to your suggestion. Ink Runner (talk) 22:29, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The parenthetical (such as Gomer Pyle and The Andy Griffiths Show) can be deleted - unnecessary to spell them out, we know they are the programs in question
  - Fixed. Ink Runner (talk) 22:29, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Final sentence: "Though told that he should not "leave" Gomer..." Told by whom? And, I'm afraid that the meaning of the rest of the sentence is far from clear to me.
  - Ah, too many Americanisms probably. Re-worded.

Production
- "to which the supervising Armed Serviceman objected to". The second "to" needs deleting. Could the "Armed Serviceman" become an "Armed Services representative"?
- "Boot Camp" needs a link (via disambiguation)
- "appeared on Gomer Pyle"; for consistency within the article, "in Gomer Pyle"
  - Fixed, Ink Runner (talk) 22:29, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- There's an awkward change of tense, to the present, in the last sentence, which also is basically saying the same things three times - all the episodes in each series form self-contained, complete stories.
Premise
- Last sentence: need to clarify that "the show" Wittebols is talking about is Gomer Pyle; as worded, it sounds as though it could be MASH
  - Fixed.
Characters
- Check WP:BOLDFACE re use of bolded characters
  - Ah, I just copied Only Fools and Horses without checking the MoS. Mea culpa. Ink Runner (talk) 22:29, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "unquestioning love and trust of the world" is in quotes. Who said it?
  - Reffed. Ink Runner (talk) 22:29, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Watch for tenses consistency, especially in the Loo-Ann Poovie paragraph.
  - Re-written
Media
- The first sentence repeats information given in the first paragraph of the History section.

I hope these comments will help you to develop the article further. Brianboulton (talk) 19:34, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]