Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Gagak Item/archive1

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 promoted by Ian Rose 10:03, 26 May 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Gagak Item edit

Featured article candidates/Gagak Item/archive1

Nominator(s): — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:52, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article because, despite its length, I am certain it meets the criteria. Gagak Item, a 1938 film, has been essentially forgotten by the media; very little seems to have survived. What is here is the result of extensive pouring over sources and providing context adequate for the average reader. As such, this article is easily the most detailed look at the film available. I'd like to thank all of the editors who gave a non-formal peer review at the talk page: Wehwalt, Sarastro1, Cassianto, and SchroCat. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:52, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Given the limited information available from what appears to be an extensive search of the sources, I think this is a rather nice little article in a rather unusual area (unusual for me, at least). Although short, this is well-written, covers what does seem to be available and is not padded out with superfluous information to make it bigger or more complex. My few concerns were dealt with at PR and I rather like this interesting piece. - SchroCat (talk) 09:31, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Schro! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:04, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Generally following SchroCat; I was also one of the peer reviewers. Well done given the limited material.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:39, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for the review! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:40, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Cryptic C62. The brevity of the article is a bit unusual for a FA, but WP:WIAFA says that an article should be comprehensive, not long. I will accept the nominator's sourcing efforts in good faith unless someone can demonstrate that there are gaps in coverage. ~~That said, here are some nitpicks.~~ I made a few minor suggestions, which the nominator promptly addressed. These can now be found on the talk page. Good work! --Cryptic C62 · Talk 23:53, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review! Just an interesting case, this is currently 200 characters longer than the shortest FA I know about, Miss Meyers. There seem to be a few FAs of similar length, but not many — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:08, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment ~~So, nothing more is available on the plot?~~--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:50, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed the note on plot.--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:54, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support: I commented on the talk page before this FAC. I think this article is comprehensive, albeit short! But I have no problems with its length, and I think the prose is clear and tight, which such a short article needs to be. Good work, and another interesting film article. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:51, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking a look! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:23, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Great things come in small packages; ever true with this fine piece of work. Congratulations! -- Cassianto ^Talk 12:02, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image check - all OK (PD-1996,PD-IDOld-Art30). Sources and publication details provided (authors unknown).

Applying Indonesian copyright for URAA calculation, see Commons-discussion. OK. GermanJoe (talk) 07:49, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:08, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As the delegates are looking for a source check (it's been a while for me, since April 2012), rest assured that I will provide scans/photographs of the relevant offline source. All others are accessible online. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:21, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sources review None of the sources cited are in English. Two are published books, one is the Film Indonesia website, and the rest are from contemporary newspapers or magazines. As far as I can judge they are all satisfactory. Brianboulton (talk) 16:13, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:19, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support A nice, short article. --JDC808 ♫ 04:13, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:30, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 10:25, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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