Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Last Temptation of Krust/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 not promoted 17:13, 1 March 2008.

Check external links

Self nomination. This is a stable WP:GA-rated article that has had a Peer Review. The article is part of Wikipedia:Featured topics/The Simpsons (season 9). I believe it meets the criteria, and will do my best to address comments as they crop up in this FAC discussion. Thanks for taking a look, Cirt (talk) 06:28, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comments. I'd like if the writing was looked over again, as so it is more professionally written.
  • Bart and Jay Leno get Krusty cleaned up - Get is such a weak word that it should be avoided. Additionally, it's not clear what cleaning up means, as it could mean either literally bathing him, cleaning up his act, etc.
  • He later sells out - sell out is vernacular; perhaps an alternative could be used, rather than using the exact phrase three times
  • Although less marketable and financially successful - quick question. Does this mean he is less marketable, but at the same time financially successful, or does it mean he is neither marketable nor financially successful?
• Also, regarding the plot, is this sentence terribly important to the plot? When Homer asks Marge for all of their money, she gives some cash to Lisa and asks her to bury it in the backyard. I hate to ask, but is there a source for the plot itself? Is the fact that he is now credible and trendy very explicit in the episode? After all, Krusty goes back to his old ways pretty easily at the end of the episode.
• Regarding the referencing, how come the commentaries are from the episode "Lisa the Skeptic"?

♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:38, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Response

Okay, will work on addressing these above points, must have just goofed with the citation for the commentaries, sorry about that. Cirt (talk) 17:44, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1. Changed to "Bart and Jay Leno bathe Krusty in the Simpsons' house" Cirt (talk) 15:09, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
2. "sells out" is such a succinct way of putting it - but I changed that sentence to "He later agrees to a deal with marketing executives in return for a new "Canyonero" sport utility vehicle, and hawks products during his next comedy appearance. " Cirt (talk) 15:12, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
3. "Although less marketable and financially successful, " -- Removed awkward phrasing, not needed. Cirt (talk) 15:13, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
4. When Homer asks Marge for all of their money, she gives some cash to Lisa and asks her to bury it in the backyard. -- This sentence in the plot is necessary to later understand something analyzed/discussed later in the article, in the Reception section. Cirt (talk) 15:16, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
5. Fixed citation for the commentaries. Cirt (talk) 15:07, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
6. The source for the plot is the plot itself, this is commonly done in a good deal of WP:FA articles on The Simpsons, and actually also on films, and I've checked in the past with this at WP:FILM. Cirt (talk) 15:17, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
7. he is now credible and trendy -- Removed this phrasing, per comment from above. Cirt (talk) 15:19, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - The reception section has a lot of unnecessary info; those other six episodes don't need to be listed and that "Among the 22-minute gems..." quote can't be shortened (maybe taken out of quotes too) because it details a lot of his opinions about other episodes. indopug (talk) 12:56, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Response

Okay, I will take a look at that and note changes here. Cirt (talk) 15:00, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1. Removed mention of the other episodes. Cirt (talk) 15:05, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
2. Shortened quote. Cirt (talk) 15:07, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Comments --Laser brain (talk) 02:38, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Prose looks great! (What, expecting to only see complaints here?)
  • The fair use rationale template for Image:The Simpsons 5F10.png is not correctly completed. The portion used is not "all"; that would mean you used the whole episode. The "source" is not a source - you need to specify if you got it from a web site, or if it's self-made.
  • I don't get the significance of pointing out that one TV station mis-labeled the episode. I would only mention that if several stations had done it, and you have a secondary source that points that out. Otherwise it's OR.
  • "Bender" is probably too colloquial or informal for our audience. Same with "hawks".
  • Is there a consensus that having an unsourced plot summary is acceptable for TV show articles? I see this a lot, but it needs to have secondary sources. Otherwise, the reader is left with your interpretation of the plot, which is OR.
  • "Mike Scully noted that the National Hockey League sent a letter which he described as a "kind of a cease and desist", but they decided not to cut the scene from the episode." Rewrite. Refers to "they" but the only "they" in the sentence is the NHL. I'm sure the NHL didn't decide not to cut the scene.
  • "The episode was still being animated three weeks before its airdate, and the production process moved frantically as the episode neared completion." Is there any indication that this doesn't happen for every episode? Not sure why it's being called out. --Laser brain (talk) 20:32, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Response

Thanks for these comments, I'll get on these and note changes here below. Cirt (talk) 23:11, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1. Prose looks great! -- Thanks, nice to hear some positive comments once in a while at a FAC discussion! Cirt (talk) 23:14, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
2. Fixed the fair use rationale for that image, per the above comments. Cirt (talk) 23:14, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
3. It's important to note that some sources referred to this episode mistakenly as "The Last Temptation of Krusty", instead of its actual title, "The Last Temptation of Krust". I will try to find some more sources for this, but if I can't, I'll remove it, as you suggested. Cirt (talk) 23:15, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   Update: -- Added more sources for this. Cirt (talk) 20:36, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

4. Changed one instance of "bender", the other is a direct quote from the episode. Changed wording from "hawk" to "markets". Cirt (talk) 23:18, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
5. Is there a consensus that having an unsourced plot summary is acceptable for TV show articles? I see this a lot, but it needs to have secondary sources. Otherwise, the reader is left with your interpretation of the plot, which is OR. -- Yes, there is in fact a consensus for this. It is done in many stable accepted consensus WP:FA articles, including articles on television episodes, as well as films. Cirt (talk) 23:19, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
6. Clarified this, changed "they" to "production staff" - per the source. Cirt (talk) 23:21, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
7. This was something that was specifically highlighted and commented on in the DVD commentary, and there is no indication that this happens for every episode, no. Cirt (talk) 23:23, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I have stricken most of my comments. I'll watch for the follow-up on the mislabeling item. --Laser brain (talk) 03:44, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the update, and I'll keep you posted on that last one. Cirt (talk) 04:52, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all the hard work on this - changed to support above. --Laser brain (talk) 02:38, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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