Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Dexter's Laboratory/archive2

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 5 October 2021 [1].


Dexter's Laboratory edit

Nominator(s):Paper Luigi TC 03:10, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a Cartoon Network original animated television series that aired in the USA from April 27, 1996 (pilot shown in 1995), to November 20, 2003. This article has been previously nominated as a Good Article on August 20, 2008 (by yours truly, albeit a much younger and naive version), and January 16, 2013 (again, by me, but a more refined version of myself), for which the nomination was accepted. During the time between the first GA review and its initial promotion, a peer review was conducted on or around July 27, 2012, that found the article in 'reviewed' status. The article was officially promoted to GA status on or around January 16, 2013, which is shortly before the animated "banned episode" "Dexter's Rude Removal" aired for the first time on public broadcast. In the 8+ years since, I have worked tirelessly to maintain the article and include any reliable sources that verify the claims that were previously unattributed. It is in my sole discretion that the current Dexter's Laboratory article should meet the FA standards and would merit its own nomination into the FA category. In the event that one or more users should protest my nomination on the grounds that the article does not measure up to quality standards as set arbitrarily by the WP community, I will hereby offer my services as an editor to relinquish those claims and restore the article I am nominating to the status of a FA. — Paper Luigi TC 03:10, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Placeholder for 100cellsman

I'll review this article soon. 웃OO 06:16, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. It appears that there are a number of scholarly works discussing this series that are not used in this article - for example Stockwell 2004 and Cornelio 2015. Could you speak to your approach to searching for sources? Nikkimaria (talk) 23:21, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sure! I did a lot of online research around early-mid 2011 by browsing The Free Library, the Google Newspaper Archive, Google Books, and reliable sources such as The New York Times to gather press releases, reviews, and interviews. About a year later, I began searching through LexisNexis and EBSCO, which were provided freely from my university, and added as many sources as I could find. The awards and DVD release sections are made up of mostly primary sources, Amazon, and TVShowsOnDVD.com links because that was the most concise and complete means of adding citations I could find. As mentioned in my (admittedly long-winded) nomination above, the series was in the public spotlight shortly after reaching GA in early 2013, and additional sources were added to the point that the banned episode was split into its own article. I continued to search for and include more sources to the page for another year or so until I became burned out on it and didn't think there was any work left to be done. The Scipedia link looks interesting and seems to have the series as a primary topic, but the other one is unfortunately behind a paywall and only mentions the series in passing in the abstract. Thank you for sharing. — Paper Luigi TC 00:04, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator comment edit

This has reached the three week mark and has attracted little attention and no support for promotion. Absent any indication that a consensus to promote may be forming I am afraid that this nomination is going to be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:55, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.