Talk:2010 Tonight Show conflict/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: RunningTiger123 (talk · contribs) 01:01, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Hi LuK3, this article caught my interest and I've decided to give it a go. It'll take some time to get through everything, but I should be able to finish it over the weekend. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:01, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 (
    lists
    )    :
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (
    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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Quick checks:

  • Copyvio check shows no major issues; closest matches are attributed quotes.
  • Images seem reasonable; the two non-free images (lead image and Kimmel) have solid rationales, and all images include proper alt text and captions.
  • The article is stable.

— RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:16, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

  • "not participate in the destruction of The Tonight Show" – this quote is never used in the body, and is therefore unattributed.
  • on appearing on television – awkward repetition, maybe try against appearing on television?
    • Changed to "...while after a contractual seven-month ban against appearing on television,...". -- LuK3 (Talk) 01:55, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

— RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:27, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Background

  • Note: From here on out, I'll assume Carter's citations are accurate.
  • Ref. 3 is okay, but not great. It would be better for a source to directly state NBC was a leader, rather than infer it from charts.
    • I changed the image caption. I think the chart is fairly straightforward in stating NBC/The Tonight Show were number 1 in viewership for most of the 90s and 2000s. If that still is insufficient please let me know and I'll find another reference. -- LuK3 (Talk) 12:16, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • which began in 1993. – should be a comma at the end
  • can compete → could compete
  • (for Leno's entire run) – this might be confusing, since it's not immediately clear if this means 2009 or 2014. I'd suggest rewording or just removing it.
    • I specified it was Leno's first stint as host.
  • Ref. 13 does not make it clear if Michaels suggested O'Brien for the role.
    • I found a Los Angeles Times article that seems to say Michaels specifically suggested O'Brien as new host. -- LuK3 (Talk) 12:16, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref. 14 never mentions a week-to-week contract.
    • There seems to be inconsistencies between the Bill Carter book and other references. Most online sources stated NBC put O'Brien on a 13-week (3 month) contract so I changed it to that. -- LuK3 (Talk) 12:16, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • 1:30 am., → 1:30 am,

— RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:44, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Early history

  • No need to link Saturday Night Live again
    • Subsequent links removed. -- LuK3 (Talk) 01:20, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • For consistency, late night should be late-night when used as an adjective (not a huge issue, just something to consider)
    • Changed a few terms, I will have to go through the entire article but I'll do it section-by-section for now. -- LuK3 (Talk) 01:20, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Swap sentences for better flow: Chernin warned... and Numerous executives...
  • will stay at NBC → would stay at NBC
  • as host well after the extension – feels like it's missing a few words, maybe as until well after the extension was signed?
    • Reformatted the sentence based on your section. -- LuK3 (Talk) 01:20, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Should it say signed instead of sign? Other wordings are fine, but the current one is wrong. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:22, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref. 28 and ref. 38 are the same
    • I removed reference 38, there are enough refs for that quote. -- LuK3 (Talk) 01:20, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • he likened his removal → Leno likened his removal
  • Ref. 43 doesn't align well with article
    • Same with ref. 54
      • Sorry, I'm a little confused regarding this point. Are you saying the physical alignment of the references are causing a problem or is it something in the formatting? -- LuK3 (Talk) 01:22, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        • My mistake, I meant that what the article says doesn't really match what the sources say (the article generally takes the statements too far). RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:20, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
          • Thanks for the clarification! I changed the NYT references and reformatted the sentence cited by the Deadline Hollywood reference. -- LuK3 (Talk) 13:50, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "paradigm shift" – cited source never uses this quote, so shouldn't be a direct quote
  • Wrong year on ref. 57

— RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:06, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ratings

  • While Zucker called O'Brien to reiterate that the generational change was expected – following source doesn't mention this
    • I changed that online reference to a Carter ref. -- LuK3 (Talk) 13:59, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • by over 2.6 million viewers – it was actually much higher according to the source
    • You're right, it was almost 5 million viewers (Letterman had 7.2 million while O'Brien had 2.4 million), thanks for pointing that out. -- LuK3 (Talk) 14:06, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • 18.4 million viewers – does not match source
    • Changed to 17.7 million based on reference. -- LuK3 (Talk) 14:06, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref. 84 does not include that direct quote
    • It looks like that quote is in the second paragraph of the source. -- LuK3 (Talk) 14:22, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • coveted 18–24 demographic should be 18–34
  • local news viewership – clarify that it's on NBC affiliates, not all networks
    • Specified it was NBC affiliate viewership. -- LuK3 (Talk) 14:22, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Use Law & Order instead of Law & Order: Special Victims Unit
  • he will return → he would return
  • Conan sidekick → O'Brien sidekick
  • Affiliate calls came at an alarming rate, and research analysis revealed... – sentence abruptly transitions from Leno to O'Brien; make the shift clearer
    • I changed it to Affiliate began calling the network to inquire about the show's fate..., perhaps that is a less jarring. -- LuK3 (Talk) 14:22, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unrelated to this specific section: Wherever the first time appears in the article, it would probably be best to add a note that all times are Eastern (or Eastern/Pacific).

— RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:35, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict

  • The "Proposed changes" section relies heavily on Carter (the first and third paragraphs are sourced almost entirely to him). This may be
    WP:UNDUE
    unless other citations can be added to show why all of these details are relevant. If more sources are not added, the sections should be trimmed.
    • I trimmed some unnecessary sentences to just focus on the Leno meeting. -- LuK3 (Talk) 14:28, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • 11:35pm → 11:35 pm for consistency
  • lamented his anxiety – weird word choice
    • Changed to ...to share his thoughts regarding the ratings. -- LuK3 (Talk) 14:36, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • including Los Angeles Times → including the Los Angeles Times
  • Only link Los Angeles Times and The New York Times at first occurrence (both are linked at least two extra times in the article)
    • Removed subsequent links. -- LuK3 (Talk) 14:36, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref. 131 and 132 should use the same citation style as the rest of the article

Reaction and media coverage

  • Ref. 140 doesn't really mention the details it supports
  • reminiscent of the Obama "Hope" poster – that's a bit of a stretch, I'm going to need a pretty clear source for that
    • I changed it to "similar" to the "Hope" poster, I believe the reference I added supports that. -- LuK3 (Talk) 14:48, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can't find anything in refs. 152–155 mentioning that Zucker's reputation was damaged (it definitely was, but sources here don't mention it)
    • Add a Variety reference that mentions Zucker's reputation. -- LuK3 (Talk) 20:37, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref. 157, 171, and 176 should have citation style updated
  • Ricky Gervais should probably be linked
    • Done.
  • Paragraph for ref. 164 is currently inappropriate
    WP:SYNTH
    because there is no source connecting the 1992 and 2010 incidents
    • I just removed that paragraph. -- LuK3 (Talk) 13:09, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Leno retained an talent agent, a publicist, and entertainment lawyers – inappropriate synthesis again with the current sources
    • Also: an talent agent → a talent agent
  • "raced past the reviled likes..." – this direct quote doesn't quite match the source
  • Paragraph on Kimmel's response seems incomplete – didn't he criticize Leno more when he appeared on "10 at 10"? That feels like something worth mentioning.
    • I added a wrap-up sentence regarding Kimmel's criticism of Leno with an Entertainment Weekly reference.
  • "There's been three hosts..." – unsourced direct quote
  • The comedians who came out in defense... – probably should have a source or be cut, especially the latter half of the sentence
    • While it was most likely true, I couldn't find a reliable source to back that up. I removed that sentence. -- LuK3 (Talk) 13:05, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • 10:00pm → 10:00 pm
  • Conan's lead-in → O'Brien's lead-in
  • Don't link NBC Sports and Dick Ebersol again
  • despite O'Brien's success... – this part of the sentence isn't mentioned in the source, so it's inappropriate synthesis
    • Last part of that sentence removed. -- LuK3 (Talk) 13:05, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

— RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:55, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Settlement

Sorry for the delay, I'll try to get the rest of the review knocked out ASAP.

  • "betrayed" is a direct quote, so it needs a source.
    • Added the NYP article with the direct quote. -- LuK3 (Talk) 12:42, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • above standard GE levels – not in source and can easily be removed
  • they have done → [they] have done
  • Ref. 216 (Carter) cannot prove that Leno's lead held for much of the rest of his run if it was published in 2010
    • Added another ref. -- LuK3 (Talk) 12:56, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • It's another 2010 source – the source should be from 2014 or later if it discussed information up to 2014. RunningTiger123

(talk) 00:41, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

        • Yeah, I added the wrong ref, it should be fixed now. -- LuK3 (Talk) 11:57, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

— RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:15, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Impact

  • Also Leno's larger staff... – sentence is not supported by source, remove
  • any effort to mention O'Brien's tenure was whitewashed from company history – overstatement, they simply removed episodes from the internet
    • I reworked that sentence to just mention the removal of reruns. -- LuK3 (Talk) 13:03, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref. 242 links to the wrong page.

— RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:27, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aftermath

  • the show averages → the show averaged
  • US$4 million per episode – source says 2 million
  • No need to link Jeff Gaspin or Rick Ludwin
  • The current wording implies both Graboff and Gaspin left in November 2011, but that's not right – the easiest fix is to remove in November 2011.
  • Ref. 258 appears to be an unauthorized copy of an episode clip – I would remove it (
    WP:COPYLINK
    ).
    • Same goes for ref. 260 and ref. 185 (latter is in a different section)
      • I changed the citation style to cite the episodes and broadcast specifically. -- LuK3 (Talk) 13:29, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • until he announced Jimmy Fallon... – weird wording; maybe use until Jimmy Fallon became the next host of the franchise in February 2014?
  • Less than a month removed from hosting Tonight... – irrelevant paragraph, remove
  • in addition to appearing on → and later appeared on (current wording implies appearances were on same date)
  • Ref. 278 doesn't talk about O'Brien or Triumph at all
  • In 2017, mention was made of the host in NBC's 90th Anniversary Special – unsourced
  • Ref. 281 doesn't mention Leno, as far as I can tell.

— RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:02, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the lengthy review and the delay – overall, it's a really strong article. Once the above comments are resolved, I'll be happy to support promotion. RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:03, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the thorough review RunningTiger123. I believe I addressed all of the issues raised above. -- LuK3 (Talk) 13:54, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are a few spots where I replied to your fixes across all sections that still need to be addressed (mostly grammar); otherwise, everything else looks good. RunningTiger123 (talk) 00:47, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for pointing those out, I believe it should be good now.​ -- LuK3 (Talk) 13:53, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good! Passing shortly. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:20, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2010_Tonight_Show_conflict/GA1&oldid=1105624389"