Ylee (talk · contribs) made some major changes to the Plot sect. These changes to a stable WP:FA article should be discussed on the talk page, with the rationale given as to why they were made. Thank you, -- Cirt (talk) 04:17, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
- Contrary to popular belief, Featured Article status confers absolutely zero immunity of any kind to further edits. In any case, FA status occurred 3 1/2 years ago, and since then the plot summary crept up to 690 words in size despite WP:TVPLOT recommending no more than 500 words. My edit cut it down to 484. (And, no, despite my enormous love for this episode and The Simpsons in general, there is no reasonable justification for going above the limit. This isn't 2001: A Space Odyssey.)
- Many of my edits tighten language and remove extraneous detail; for example,
- He only appears briefly, riding through the fields in a Rolls-Royce while waving to his followers from a slightly opened window with a white-gloved hand.
- became
- He only appears briefly, waving to his followers from a Rolls-Royce.
- The details of exactly how Bart, Lisa, and Maggie are brainwashed are relatively unimportant to what is supposed to be a brief plot summary; what is more important is that Marge is the only Simpson who isn't. Similarly, although I burst out laughing every time I see Rover chasing Marge and hear The Prisoner's theme music, it is not necessary to provide the details of the Movementarian compound's security; just that it is heavily guarded. Ylee (talk) 05:06, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
- Respectfully disagree, many of the parts removed are needed in the plot sect, for they are discussed in later parts of the article. -- Cirt (talk) 05:10, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
- On the contrary, nothing was removed that the rest of the article depends on. The elements comprising the compound's defenses are sufficiently described in the Themes and Cultural references sections. Ylee (talk) 05:39, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
- I posted a notice to WT:DOH. I would like to hear thoughts of additional editors before moving forward on this issue. -- Cirt (talk) 05:40, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
I see nothing wrong with the edit. Ylee was largely removing overdetailing which was slipped into the article since the FAC anyway. -- Scorpion0422 19:23, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Y Done, I self-reverted back to the prior version by Ylee (talk · contribs). Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 19:32, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
This article has an assessment summary page.
