Talk:Long, Long Time (The Last of Us)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Good articleLong, Long Time (The Last of Us) has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 24, 2024Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on February 27, 2023.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Linda Ronstadt's "Long, Long Time" saw a 4,900-percent increase in Spotify streams in the United States in the hour after the broadcast of the third episode of The Last of Us?

"Best episode overall" vs "best to date"

The show is only 3 episodes in, and "best to date" is both factual (covering best overall until otherwise needed) and more sustainable writing (if episode 4 is suddenly the best, the 2nd option means you don't have to change 2 wiki pages). Mxbndr (talk) 07:47, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@
he/him) 07:57, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Neither "Best episode overall" and "Best to date" are factual. They are both opinion-based. Saying that current phrasing is "sustainable" implies that you have already decided this will be the best episode forever, regardless of what happens next, which suggests an ulterior motive. 58.80.201.106 (talk) 06:55, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't decided anything, but the sources have. Unless every journalist and reviewer retrospectively changes their mind, the phrasing is, in fact, sustainable. Suggestions of "an ulterior motive" are laughable. –
he/him) 07:02, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bruxton (talk) 12:55, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
Craig Mazin
Craig Mazin
Nick Offerman
Nick Offerman
Murray Bartlett
Murray Bartlett

Converted from a redirect by Rhain (talk). Self-nominated at 01:27, 1 February 2023 (UTC). Note: As of October 2022, all changes made to promoted hooks will be logged by a bot. The log for this nomination can be found at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Long, Long Time (The Last of Us), so please watch a successfully closed nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: @Rhain: To be honest, these hooks aren't really that interesting. The only one I find remotely interesting is Alt3 but the linking of the real town of lincoln in the hook kind of makes the hook confusing with it suggesting that the real town of lincoln was made by them in six to twelve weeks. Also Earwig reports severe copyright issues. I do think that they might've just copied off wikipedia though but I would like some confirmation. Onegreatjoke (talk) 21:18, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Onegreatjoke: Fair enough—I've written some really uninteresting hooks in my time and actually consider these some of the better ones, but to each their own. Here are some alternatives:
And yes, IMDb has definitely copied from Wikipedia, not the other way around. –
he/him) 00:20, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
  • @
    ping}} me in replies) 17:08, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Those hooks can be considered better. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:17, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source summary -- Ellie's gun?

Do you think it's important enough to mention Ellie gets a gun this episode? It's mentioned by secondary source recaps:

Joel won't let Ellie take a gun; but when he isn't looking, she finds the pistol Frank kept stashed in a writing desk, and she shoves into her backpack. This will undoubtedly appear again later.

— Murray, Noel (30 January 2023). "'The Last of Us' Season 1, Episode 3 Recap: One More Good Day". The New York Times.

By the episode's end, she’ll have one she’s keeping secret from Joel. (This would seem to be Chekhov's gun in action, but we'll have to wait and see.)

— Phipps, Keith (29 January 2023). "The Last of Us Recap: This Is You". Vulture.

Ellie, who has been begging for a gun, finds one, which she stashes in her backpack without telling Joel. That will either be a problem or come in handy soon.

— Cote, Davie (30 January 2023). "In The Last Of Us, Nick Offerman and Murray Bartlett prove true love survives the apocalypse". The A.V. Club.

I think that if the gun becomes a plot point in a future episode, that it should be mentioned here. Thoughts? Umimmak (talk) 21:52, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, good point. –
he/him) 00:18, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Good article?

This article's looking pretty good! I hope an editor has plans to nominate for Good article status. ---Another Believer (Talk) 23:22, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Passed. λ NegativeMP1 17:10, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is
transcluded from Talk:Long, Long Time (The Last of Us)/GA1
. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: NegativeMP1 (talk · contribs) 19:40, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you could say this nomination was waiting a long, long time. I'll take a look at this one soon. λ NegativeMP1 19:40, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

General criteria

Checking the criteria listed at

WP:GAFAIL
:

  • Article seems to be close to meeting the criteria at first glance.
  • No copyright violations seem to be present.
  • No cleanup banners or tags present.
  • No edit warring, in-fact the article has been mostly stagnant for a while.
  • No previous GA review to take into account.

I'll get to reviewing the prose and spot-checking references shortly. λ NegativeMP1 18:15, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That was a lie, whoops. Anyways, here you go.

Review

Prose

Near nothing wrong with this.

  • "Mazin's script was published by Deadline in May 2023, considered one of the ten drama series most likely for an Emmy nomination." Latter part doesn't make any sense.
  • "Critics overwhelmingly considered the episode the season's best,[5][62][63] and some named it among the greatest television episodes;[64][65][66] The Hollywood Reporter's Daniel Fienberg felt it elevated the series to a new level,[4] Empire's John Nugent called it "moving, surprisingly romantic, and one of the finest hours of television in recent memory",[67] and The Guardian's Andy Welch described it as "absolutely magical television"." This sentence should be broken up, probably after the outlets saying it was among the greatest television episodes.

Images

  • Consider adding alt text to all of the images.
  • The only not-public domain image in use here is the infobox image, which seems to be justified as a point of discussion in the article.

Sources

  • Spotchecked some uses of 17, 30, 39, 2, 20, as well as 64, 65, 66, 91, and 96. Particularly focused on the reception bits due to the "among the greatest television" and a review bombing definitely being areas that need high quality sourcing.
    • 65 and 66 only describe the episode as being one of the best in recent years. Maybe have attribution here (ex. X and Y named it among the greatest television episodes in recent years, while Z named it one of the greatest of all time.)

There isn't really a whole lot that needs to be addressed, overall an extremely well written article and probably one of the greatest I've read related to TV episodes. I'll put this on hold for now. λ NegativeMP1 19:06, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@
he/him) 09:20, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Alright, looks good to me. Passing this, good job. λ NegativeMP1 17:09, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Long,_Long_Time_(The_Last_of_Us)&oldid=1217605601"