Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Joker (comics)/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 Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 01:04, 23 January 2017 [1].

Joker (comics) edit

Nominator(s): Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 13:29, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the fictional supervillain the Joker, arguably one of the most famous characters in the western world, and definitely among the top comic characters and villains of all time. Over the course of several years I've slowly helped expand the article from just before my earliest edit here to what it is today. It paradoxically isn't the easiest thing to find sources for a lot of information about a character that is 75 years old, but I finally think that the article is as complete as it can be at this point and that it is ready to stand among our best articles. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 13:29, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~ for the exact same unaddressed reasons as in the first FAC. These are the minor and superficial changes that have been made since the first FAC closed. I hope you don't think you can just keep throwing this back at FAC until it happens to slip through. Delist, and figure out whether this article is about the Joker character or the character's appearances in comics, then begin fixing it once you've figured that out. Curly "the jerk" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 13:45, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Joker (character) was made per your suggestion, this article focuses on the comic character. FYI for any other editors, this was last nominated for FAC over 15 months ago and THESE are the changes made since then, not the link to which Curly linked above. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 16:21, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You're right—I got the wrong diff dates. The opening sentence is better, but the article still needs to be retitled: "Joker IS-A comics" is simply absurd. Curly "the jerk" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 22:21, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm reinstating my oppose under 1(e) (stability) as one of the editors proposes unilaterally making the character's comics appearances the base article. This issue won't be cleared up soon, so the FAC should be withdrawn. Curly "the jerk" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 23:14, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1e: stable: it is not subject to ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured article process.

Your debate with DarkKnight is not of any impact to the stability of the article and I ask you withdraw your oppose. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 23:23, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The issues are not being solved, and we have a declaration from an editor to disrupt things. That's unstable. Deal with the problems first—there's no reason to rush an FAC. Curly "the jerk" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 23:35, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The solution is so simple, too, and I proposed it back in the first FAC: rename the article to something like Joker in comics, and then you don't have to deal with any of the stuff you're not intereseted in. If the article is moved to Joker (character), then you'll have a lot of work to do to meet the expectations of readers who have come to read about the character named "Joker", most of whom will have come after watching something like Suicide Squad. Curly "the jerk" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 23:41, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone looking for the Suicide Squad Joker would go to the Suicide Squad article. If they wound up at the comic character article, they'd go to the In Other Media section which would link them to the Suicide Squad article. The comic character links readily and easily to any relevant areas or separate articles as required, so I don't see the harm in moving it to Joker (character), as it's scope leads the reader to absolutely everything Joker related. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 00:04, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Or we could avoid all this nonsense and simply title the article to ensure people get to where they intended. Curly "the jerk" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 01:37, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I'm not convinced that the problems from last time have been dealt with. The instant accusations of bad faith above are telling, while, according to one editor over at Talk:Joker (comics) "We've established that [[Joker (character)]] will likely be deleted after the FAC (and rightly so)". Josh Milburn (talk) 17:36, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Joker (character) is not the subject of this review. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 17:50, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It shouldn't be, but it calls into question the good faith of the nomination. Please explain. Curly "the jerk" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 22:21, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A user on the Joker (comics) talk page does not think the Joker (character) article is necessary because the comic character is the primary and source topic. The comment relayed by J Milburn is of that one user, and my only involvement in that discussion is about a completely separate article about the film version of the character. I created Joker (character) 8 months ago and then I left it alone because I personally have no interest in developing that separate article. It's existence is in no way an influence on my nomination of the Joker (comics) article. I've bought books with my own money to develop the Joker (comics) article, I just want it to be as good as it can be. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 23:04, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the confusion is that the user in question with a flaky understanding of semantics is Darkknight2149, and being confused with Darkwarriorblake. It looks like WP:COMICS is trying to have its way with the world again. Regardless, this article still needs to be moved. Curly "the jerk" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 23:18, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is no excuse for the existence of Joker (character). This isn't any different from any other comics character article. The character is primarily a DC Comics character that primarily appears in DC Comics publications that has merely been adapted in other media. Joker (comics) IS the base article (again, just like every other comics character article) and Joker (character) therefore should be deleted accordingly. Dark Knight 2149 00:20, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You're making all the same arguments that makes talking to WP:COMICS folk such an embarassing headache. Curly "the jerk" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 00:24, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And on that note, I say we continue this argument on Talk:Joker (comics). There's no reason to have it on two places at once. Dark Knight 2149 00:40, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above "conversation" is predictably not going anywhere, but I thought I'd stop by to give some friendly advice to the nominator. This is not required for FA, but to make the article more reader-friendly, you may want to take a look at WP:CITEBUNDLE, which shows a number of techniques for bundling inline citations together so as to avoid things like "Hamill was replaced by Troy Baker for the 2013 prequel, Batman: Arkham Origins, and the Arkham series' animated spin-off Batman: Assault on Arkham,^{[209][228][229][230]}", which break up the prose and interfere with the reading experience. Curly "the jerk" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 05:59, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Can I suggest that this candidacy is put on hold until the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joker (character) is resolved? For obvious reasons, this may have a considerable effect on the article under discussion here and/or reviewers' approach to it. Josh Milburn (talk) 03:46, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I agree with Josh Milburn's proposal that this candidacy should be put on hold until the discussion is resolved. It may be best to even close this altogether as it does not look like the discussion will be resolved in the near future unfortunately. I choose to stay out of the discussion as I am not familiar enough with how articles on comic book characters are run to contribute anything meaningful so I apologize for not being much help with that. Aoba47 (talk) 18:29, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Coord note -- with no discussion for two weeks, and in light of the recommendations above, I'm archiving this nom; I think a PR would be appropriate before considering re-nominating at FAC. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:03, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been archived, 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) 01:04, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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