Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/You Only Move Twice

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 21:04, 31 July 2007.

You Only Move Twice edit

Just came aross this while browsing. Thought it looked very impressive.Buc 06:12, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I'm one of the main contributors to the page, and this nom stunned me. I think it needs work in its present form, so I'll see what I can do. I'll address any concerns about the page, but it is modelled after Cape Feare and Homer's Phobia, both of which are featured articles. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 06:19, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think some mention of the plot is required in the lead: would that need a cite? Alientraveller 09:12, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Most immediate thing that comes to mind, the lead section does not meet lead criteria. You might want to read Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles#Lead section. BIGNOLE

(Contact me) 11:26, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Something here annoys me, and it's bugged me ever since I passed the GAC. Wouldn't it better to have a screenshot of the Simpsons' kitchen rather than the "eh" of the Globex employees? Alientraveller 20:28, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Does one exsist? Buc 09:54, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - It would be no problem to get a screenshot, I just don't think it's necessary. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 14:44, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's just the image in the production section is one whole "eh"? I'd prefer an image of the kitchen, considering it is modelled on a real one. Alientraveller

Again, does one exsist? Buc 17:34, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again, if one is deemed preferable either Scorpion or I could get one in the space of 5 minutes. Gran² 17:52, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~ Support - Please redo the section on leads. In addition, I feel the references need work. Specifically, you don't need a reference (especially the same one) for every sentence, merely every claim. For example you don't need Blah blah blah.² Blah blah blah.² Blah blah blah.² when Blah blah blah. Blah blah blah. Blah blah blah.² will suffice. In addition, I feel this article could use some more images (only 2?). On top of that, the prose isn't exactly the best. In short, it seems like a nice article, but doesn't quite satisfy the merits of a Featured Article. — BQZip01 — ^talk 21:44, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any image that could be included would be fair use, and we are trying to limit the number of fair use images on the page. We've been trying to hunt down a free one of Albert Brooks (Hank Scorpio) to no avail. As for the references, I was basically trying to get citation for every fact that could otherwise be seen as POV/OR. The lead is modelled after other Simpsons episode FAs, but I'll clean it up where I can and I'll do what I can for the prose. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 21:53, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough on the images, but I still think that there could be more images (I understand limiting fair use stuff, but I believe the lack of images detracts from the articles). If we disagree, we disagree. As for the lead, wow. I can't imagine what I was thinking when writing that. What I meant to say was to read the article on how leads should be done. The big thing is that everything in the lead should later be mentioned in the article and, therefore, needs no references. — BQZip01 — ^talk 03:19, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All cites are clear from the lead. Also I find it hilarious that you used the link to my talk page to represent a reference, very good. Gran² 15:07, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I had to use something to demonstrate my point; thought you might find it amusing if you ever caught it. :-)

The problem is not the fact that the lead's citations are bad in some way, but that it has them at all. IAW Wikipedia:Lead section, "since the lead summarizes the main text (which will be referenced), supplying citations in the lead as well is an unnecessary duplication" It has been fixed by Scorpion⁰⁴²². Accordingly, it now has my support, but I feel that the text could certainly be more compelling and an additional fair use image would contribute to the article. — BQZip01 — ^talk 15:40, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm on the borderline of casting my "vote" as not supporting this article. The major problem I'm having is the line: He works for a Steve Jobs-esque boss named Hank Scorpio who, unbeknownst to Homer, is an Ernst Stavro Blofeld style supervillain. Is there any reference for the article's claim is that Scorpio is a "Steve Jobs-esque" because that is merely an opinion. --Souphanousinphone 02:56, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Also, I want to add is that is it necessary to mention IGN in the intro? The Cape Feare and Homer's Phobia's article intros mention the Emmy awards because it is the United States' television industry major award. While, IGN is just some popular website that targets certain demographics which are usually teenagers up to 30 something males. --Souphanousinphone 03:12, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - - If you had read the article, you would have seen that there is a similar statement in the production section. Scorpio is compared to both Steve Jobs and Blofield in the DVD commentary by Josh Weinstein. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 03:27, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      - We shouldn't be specific with awards one in the lead anyway. It may be an American show, but it's broadcast in other locations, and since this is an english Wikipedia and not the American Wikipedia, we shouldn't give preference to these awards in the lead. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 03:18, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        Basically, I added it because I felt some sourced mention of the episodes acclaim was needed. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:10, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support - I just realized that was capable of supporting the page because I didn`t nominate it. It`s come a long way since the nom and I think it is much better than it was. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:10, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ratings would be nice and it seems that the reception section is made up of opinions from the show's crew. In the "Plot" section, it says, "Homer does an excellent job of motivating his team, but notices that they are starting to get overworked. He decides to motivate them by buying them hammocks..." It might be better to say, "Homer notices that they are starting to get overworked. He decides to motivate them by buying them hammocks..." --thedemonhog talk • edits 19:36, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- It's very hard to find ratings info for Simpsons episodes from reliable sources. I've tried using the Nielson website, but it hasn't worked out very well for me. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:42, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. 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.