" 

 Some further things to clear up: 
 *File:Dubrovnik crop.jpg has author issues that need clearing up as the uploader and author are not the same person it appears. 
 *File:Malta191.jpg needs a description better than ""I am the author of this picture"". 

 *This portion: ""The four seasons ordered so far each consist of ten episodes. Most episodes from the first and second season run for about 52 minutes, while many of the third season's episodes are 56 or 57 minutes long. The series' pilot and the second and third season finale run for more than an hour."" seems almost unquestionable and like basic math but it makes some analysis and needs a source for the claim. Also, ""so far"" seems constraining. Would something like ""As of...be more appropriate with a source to lessen the perception of original research? 
 *I believe there is an MOS issue with the tables. Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Embedded lists#Size ""Consideration should be given to keeping embedded lists and tables as short as feasible for their purpose and scope: material within an embedded list should relate to the article topic without going into unnecessary detail; and statistical data kept to a minimum per policy.  

 Some material may not be appropriate for reducing or summarizing using the summary style method. Consideration may be needed to either keep all the material embedded in the main article or split it off entirely into a sub-article, leaving a  template..."". I think the tables are excessive for GA with the exception be the table in the ""Adaptation schedule"" section. I would split the other table lists off and link from the main article. 

 *Captions. This seems to be very common but, all claims even in the captions of the images must be referenced unless captioned with straight forward information such as the name subject or location. Most of the images in the article are making claims needing some sort of source even the claim about cosplay. I suggest simply changing all captions to be as straightforward as possible."