This is the official symbol of A-class articles on Wikipedia.
Welcome to WikiProject The X-Files' A-Class review (ACR) center. Here, we decide which articles in our scope are to become A-Class articles. A-Class articles are almost at featured quality, which exemplifies Wikipedia's best work, but the article will require a little more work, or copy-editing to get to that status. All editors are welcome to review nominations, according to the A-Class criteria. The X-Files WikiProject also allows lists for A-Class status quality! So, feel free to nominate lists.
Before nominating an article, nominators may wish to receive feedback by listing it at peer review. Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article prior to a nomination. Nominators are expected to respond positively to constructive criticism and to make efforts to address objections promptly. An article should not be on featured article candidates, peer review, or good article nominations while on ACR. Please do not split ACR pages into subsections using header code (if necessary, embolden headings).
One of the A-Class directors—either Grapple X, TBrandley, or TRLIJC19—determines the timing of the process for each nomination. For an article to be approved for A-Class status, consensus must be reached that it meets the criteria. Consensus is built among reviewers and nominators; a director determines whether there is consensus. A nomination will be removed from the list and failed if, in the judgment of a director:
actionable objections have not been resolved;
consensus for approval has not been reached;
insufficient information has been provided by reviewers to judge whether the criteria have been met; or
a nomination is unprepared, after at least one reviewer has suggested it be withdrawn.
A director will update the article talk page after the article is approved or the nomination failed; the delay in listing the article as A-Class can range from minutes to several days, and the {{A-Class-X-Files}} template should remain on the talk page until a director updates {{ArticleHistory}}.
Before nominating an article, ensure that it meets all of the A-Class criteria and that peer reviews are closed and archived. The toolbox (at right) can help you check some of the criteria.
Place {{subst:A-Class-X-Files}} on the talk page of the nominated article and save the page.
From the ACR template, click on the red "initiate the nomination" link or the blue "leave comments" link. You will see pre-loaded information; leave that text. If you are unsure how to complete a nomination, please post to the talk page for assistance.
Below the preloaded title, complete the nomination page, sign with ~~~~ and save the page.
Copy this text: {{Wikipedia:WikiProject The X-Files A-Class review/name of nominated article/archiveNumber}} (substituting Number), and edit this page (i.e., the page you are reading at the moment), pasting the template at the top of the list of nominations. Replace "name of ..." with the name of your nomination. This will transclude the nomination into this page. In the event that the title of the nomination page differs from this format, use the page's title instead.
Supporting and opposing
To respond to a nomination, click the "Edit" link to the right of the article nomination (not the "Edit this page" link for the whole ACR page). All editors are welcome to review nominations.
To support a nomination, write *'''Support''', followed by your reason(s), which should be based on a full reading of the text. If you have been a significant contributor to the article before its nomination, please indicate this. A reviewer who specializes in certain areas of the A-Class criteria should indicate whether the support is applicable to all of the criteria.
To oppose a nomination, write *'''Object''' or *'''Oppose''', followed by your reason(s). Each objection must provide a specific rationale that can be addressed. If nothing can be done in principle to address the objection, a director may ignore it. References on style and grammar do not always agree; if a contributor cites support for a certain style in a standard reference work or other authoritative source, reviewers should consider accepting it. Reviewers who object are strongly encouraged to return after a few days to check whether their objection has been addressed. To withdraw the objection, strike it out (with <s> ... </s>) rather than removing it. Alternatively, reviewers may hide lengthy, resolved commentary in a cap template with a signature in the header.
If a nominator feels that an Oppose has been addressed, they should say so after the reviewer's signature rather than striking out or splitting up the reviewer's text. Per talk page guidelines, nominators should not cap, alter, strike, break up, or add graphics to comments from other editors; replies are added below the signature on the reviewer's commentary. If a nominator finds that an opposing reviewer is not returning to the nomination page to revisit improvements, this should be noted on the nomination page, with a diff to the reviewer's talk page showing the request to reconsider.
Use of graphics or templates including graphics (such as {{done}} and {{not done}}) is discouraged, as they slow down the page load time.
To provide constructive input on a nomination without specifically supporting or objecting, write *'''Comment''' followed by your advice.
I am nominating this for A-Class because I would like to get this up to FA. Although this isn't one of the best episodes the show produced (far from it), I still feel it is important, as it brings an end to Millennium and sets up other things (kissy kissy). Gen. Quon(Talk) 07:10, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
I haven't seen this episode in years, and I've only seen a few Millennium episodes, so I cant provide details too intricate. But from what I observed:
In the lead; "while others felt that it was not a decent bookend for the Millennium TV series." -> should probably omit bookend for conclusion or something more direct, and "TV" series?
The episode serves as a crossover with the series Millennium, also created by Chris Carter, and was meant to bring closure to the recently-cancelled series." "Also created by Chris Carter"? Article doesn't even establish who Carter is at that point.
"In this episode, an associate of the Millennium Group, which believes the apocalypse will happen on the new year of 2000, resurrects the dead for use in the bringing about of the apocalypse." -> I think this reads a little awkwardly, and don't quote me on this but I think "In this episode, an associate of the Millennium Group—which believes the apocalypse will happen on the new year of 2000—resurrects the dead for use in the bringing about of the apocalypse." is more correct here (I think).
In the plot section; 'aiming for the head' -> quotes either indirect or direct should be referenced. I would suggest just changing the line to "targeting the head" or something.
In the background section: "Both episodes were written by Darin Morgan" -> as great as Darin is, it doesn't seem that vital that he happened to write both episodes unless it can be connected to this episode directly somehow.
Visual suggestion: use a picture of either Steven King or George Romero in the background section, and move the picture of Henrikson to the reception section, using a caption like "Before its premiere, the episode was promoted with a marathon of Millennium of episodes hosted by Lance Henrikson". I think the biggest section should have an image, and I don't see how anything else would fit there besides a picture of Duchovney and Anderson.
Writing and filming: section uses alot of rather long quotes, some of these could be paraphrased without losing much content.
Same section: "first truly romantic kiss" -> I feel that there are better ways to say this, and I think that sentence would require a reference considering its magnitude.
In the themes section -> "The episode makes prominent use of John 11:25–26 from the Christian Bible, which reads "Who soever liveth and believeth in me shall never die"." direct quotes should be referenced. And I dunno, shouldn't a prominent figure like Jesus be wikilinked?
Really nitpicky, but the word "episode" is used 63 times throughout a relatively short article. I once got into trouble for this.
You probably already know this, but the images don't have alt text and the date references aren't consistent.
I tried looking up some references, but it's a bitch finding good ones since searching "millennium" + "The X-Files" barely brings up anything about this particular episode, and hybrids like "Millennium X-Diles season 7" and "Millennium X-Files crossover" didn't really bring up much either. Considering the edit history, you're probably already aware of this,
If I was more familiar with the episode, I could provide more elaborate comments, but at this point no one knows more about X-Files FA articles than you so I guess it's not that vital. No need to go respond to them individuality either, since they're mostly suggestions. Bruce Campbell (talk) 04:14, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for taking time to look over this. The more nitpickier the better. How's this shizam look now?--Gen. Quon(Talk) 19:58, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
I'm questioning whether the infobox image really adds anything. I thought there used to be something better there, but I can't remember what it was.
"being watched by" → "having been watched by" Just thinks it sounds more professional.
There seem to be quite a few semicolons in the plot summary; it felt to me that they disrupted the flow by adding more pauses. (And I don't know if I just ruined my point by using a semicolon.)
Is "the plot progresses" necessary?
"Meanwhile, Dick Clark's New Year's Rockin' Eve is on a television in the background, as the countdown begins. Frank decides to leave, and Mulder and Scully are left watching the final countdown." Double use of "countdown".
"For this reason, the episode is often cited as a way to bring closure to the Millennium series and its story arc.[5][6] The episode features the last appearances of Frank Black and Jordan Black." Perhaps combine these sentences?
The "Jose Chung" incidental crossover strikes me as trivia, especially since they are cited to the episodes themselves and weren't actual intentional crossovers like this one. They just reused the character.
Is the caption "The episode was in part inspired by the work of director George Romero." accurate? Is it referring to the director's general work, or just the movie Stephen King cites?
"... but rather to answer the question of "what would happen if Frank Black came into Mulder and Scully's world." Shouldn't there be a question mark there somewhere?
I think the lead should have some mention of the zombies, in terms of production. Ditto with the kiss; say what the production team intended rather than what one critic thought.
Broadcast and reception: mention which network the episode aired on? And link FX.
"It was viewed by 15.09 million viewers" is just kind of dropped in...maybe more context?
" noting that the episode's premise felt, "stylistically wrong for Millennium." I don't think there needs to be a comma after "felt"
"He noted, that while he had never seen an episode of Millennium, he felt that the series mythology and story-arcs..." → "He noted that, while he had never seen an episode of Millennium, the series mythology and story-arcs..."
"...asking, "why they didn't lock lips sooner." Question mark?
I am nominating this for A-Class because I would like to see it be promoted to FA one of these days. It's a good complimentary episode for "Deadalive", and I think it's ready for its next stage.Gen. Quon(Talk) 20:49, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
After a small edit to fix some problems I found, think I can support. igordebraga≠ 01:46, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Lol, I just realized that this is still open. It's only been, what, half a decade?--Gen. Quon(Talk) 19:37, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
I was working on this today and just couldn't stop. I think it has A-class potential, and even FA if there's a bit more added. Feel free to leave comments and suggestions.--Gen. Quon(Talk) 06:36, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
