The series follows Lizzie McGuire, a 13-year-old girl who faces the personal and social issues of adolescence alongside her best friends, Miranda and Gordo, at — the commas are a tad confusing as it could mean "The series follows Lizzie McGuire (a 13-year-old girl who faces the personal and social issues of adolescence alongside her best friends), Miranda and Gordo, at" or "The series follows Lizzie McGuire (a 13-year-old girl who faces the personal and social issues of adolescence alongside her best friends, Miranda and Gordo) at"... y'know
I've tried to simplify this sentence by splitting into two.
Episodes depict Lizzie's transition into adolescence at home and school, including the friends' rivalry with their classmate, Kate, and affections for Ethan — remove comma before Kate (assuming she isn't their only classmate)
Fixed.
Kate hope to date. — remove the full stop
Done.
school. He likes Miranda. — the short sentence kinda feels outta place here...
Fixed.
had with Lizzie and Miranda ... who does not speak. ... who likes to create trouble for him. ... laid-back substitute teacher whom she perceives as cool. ... Lizzie's nerdy but tough classmate. ... Kate's older cousin. — remove the full stops
Removed all.
Lizzie" persona; and was also — is the semi-colon used correctly here? I'm not familiar with this kinda use
Replace with comma.
were produced; a standard — ditto
Apologies for all of the semi-colons!
star LaLaine and be produced — comma after LaLaine
Added.
the series was not picked up in favor of Disney choosing — feels a bit clunky; is the "Disney choosing" bit necessary?
Removed.
In 2014, Duff stated that she would be open for a reunion, and in December 2018, stated that there had been discussions about reviving the series. — the single-sentence paragraph feels kinda choppy. Is it possible to combine it with another para or expand it?
Yes, have added to the following paragraph about the revival.
Lizzie at the age of thirty, navigating life as an apprentice to an interior decorator, while living in an apartment in Brooklyn, New York City, engaged to a man who owns a restaurant in SoHo, Manhattan — this is a lot of info for one sentence and some of it gets lost. Can this be split?
Yes, have split and reworded this sentence.
commended the series' realistic representation of friendship and noted its relatability for both boys and girls — seems to run afoul of WP:VOICE
This is included because it provides an independent review. Please let me know if it is not suitable and I will remove.
Seems fine for GA, but is it needed for the first usage (in #Development)? It seems to be sourcing a statement of fact there.
Sitcomsonline.com
Removed.
C21 Media
Removed.
Premiere.com
Replaced.
J&L Video Games New York City
Replaced.
The Gateway Magazine
Removed.
Spotchecks:
ref 23: Y
ref 42: Y
ref 53: Y
ref 65: Y
Other
Nothing from #Critical response is mentioned in the lead
Added a sentence.
#Home media is rather thin, and the source doesn't seem to justify it being in the article per WP:DUE
I've removed this. It was one of those sections fans insisted on included.
Not really sure it's necessary to include the RT approval score and consensus in #Film... can we just say something along the lines of "the film received mixed review from critics, who thought the show's fans would enjoy it but found it superficial"
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed
@Pamzeis: Thank you for the review. I have addressed all of the above... I just a couple of questions about two of the sources above (LukeFord.net and DVDizzy.com) SatDis (talk) 11:17, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Second look
series stars Hilary Duff as the titular character ... and an animated version of the character voiced by Duff — ignoring the embedded clause that I removed (not actually but I just ellipsed it out), this seems pretty clunky and awkward. Can it be reworded?
Agreed. Reworded.
due to its relatable plot and important moral — seems to state opinion as fact
Fixed.
Almost over the edge to GA! Just a few minor fixes, in addition to a comment about the sources above. Pamzeis (talk) 12:57, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Pamzeis: Thanks again! All addressed. The source was not needed in #Development, so removed.
@Pamzeis: Just pinging again in case you missed it. SatDis (talk) 12:58, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Seems the first ping didn't go through... I'll go for a third look now. Pamzeis (talk) 14:08, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed
Third look
The series was broadcast in Australia on the ABC. — what's the significance of the broadcasting network in Australia? The source doesn't seem to justify the inclusion...
Mostly seems fine. Just one question and this'll be good to go! Pamzeis (talk) 14:08, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Pamzeis: Not really significant, so have removed. All addressed, thanks! SatDis (talk) 21:43, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Passing the article. Pamzeis (talk) 02:26, 28 February 2023 (UTC)