Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sesame Street/August 2005

Sesame Street edit

Hi all, this is a self-nom, though dozens have contributed to and revised the article. Anyway, it's a notable topic, pretty definitive article, and of international significance thanks to syndication in 100+ countries at some point or another, and many local spin-off productions.

All of the images have been properly tagged, so far as I'm aware of. I've avoided publicity photos and other fair use images, in preference of screenshots. Sadly, there's very few non-merchandise images that could truely be free, as the set is closed to the public.
The article has been under the scrutiny of peer review three times amd FAC twice (29 Sep 2004, 26 Oct 2004), all of which should either be found on the article's talk page, or in the recent peer review's template.
If more references/notes are needed, please state which areas are of most urgency. I've not bothered with extraneous references, as very little of the content can be disputed.
Finally, the article doesn't fit with the Wikiproject Television template, but I created that template a few years ago, just to fill in some spare time, and forgot it existed. I'll be eventually revising the Wikiproject to better suit what's really the best format for an article.

Fire away! -- user:zanimum (PS, my goal, even if I don't get the article featured in this round, is to have the article as the November 8th featured article on the front page, the same goal I had for the first two nominations.

Object. It's nice to see that all the images are properly tagged, but since every last one of them is "fair use", the image description pages need to include an explanation as to why use on the Sesame Street article constitutes fair use. See Wikipedia:Image description page#Fair use rationale for information on what should be included, and Sunset Boulevard (film) for a particularly good example. --Carnildo 21:30, 12 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Minor object. Most of my points were cleared up in the recent peer review, but I'd just like to see all the pics spread out better in the article. They seem to bunch up in sections, with all text in others. I feel its a better look if they are distributed evenly. Thanks. Harro5 22:44, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
Object - I like the article and the only thing that concerns me about the text is that there is very little discussion of the educational element of the program. Considering that it's such a cultural icon, I'd like to know more about how it influenced future children's programming, as well as some expansion on the educational side of it. ie what do its supporters consider it does very well, what does its detractors consider it does very poorly. Also the comments about educational value need to be taken out of the section covering urban legends etc, as that trivializes it. With regards to the images, they're great, but 15 is too many for any article. They really need to be culled as they make the page look very busy &ndash perhaps appropriately for a Sesame Street article :-) - but images, especially fair use images should be used sparingly. Rossrs 05:29, 13 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Object: Agree with Rossrs, more discussion of the educational element. The mearchandising section is a little short as well and has many red linksAlso need some debate on the shows current health drive (eg the Cookie Monster now advocates cookies as an "occasional food", political correctness gone bananas in my opinion). Zerbey 02:29, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
Object: It's obvious that a lot of research and a lot of effort has gone into this article, and I'd be pleased to see it as a Featured Article. Sesame Street is an icon in the educational television industry. Would it not be worthwhile to expand on the content in "The Muppets" and reorganize it so that it does not appear so cluttered and disorganized? In an encyclopedic article of such prominence? RogerK 01:09, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note, the new content on Elmo's controversy, I didn't write that, and it's got valid content, but not written completely POV. It'll be worked on...