Talk:Burt Hummel

Burt Hummel has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 14, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

Fictional characters

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

Television: Glee Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Glee task force (assessed as High-importance).

Sources[edit]

Development[edit]

Ghosh, Korbi (July 12, 2010). "GLEE: Mike O'Malley on his Emmy Nom, Playing Opposite Chris Colfer and Cory Monteith". Give Me My Remote. Retrieved February 2, 2011.
Jensen, Michael (August 26, 2010). "Mike O'Malley Might Not Have an Emmy (Yet), But He Has Legions of Gay Fans". AfterElton.com. Logo. Retrieved February 2, 2011.
Ausiello, Michael (August 29, 2010). "'Glee' Scoop: Jayma Mays, Mike O'Malley talk 'Wemma,' Kurt/Finn, and The Boss". Entertainment Weekly. Time Inc. Retrieved February 2, 2011.
Berk, Brett (April 27, 2010). "Glee's Chris Colfer Wants to Show You His Ass". Vanity Fair. Condé Nast Publications. Retrieved February 2, 2011.
Wightman, Catriona (July 23, 2010). "'Glee' creator praises Mike O'Malley". Digital Spy. Hachette Filipacchi UK. Retrieved February 2, 2011.
DuFord, Stacey (November 5, 2010). "Chris And Stacey's Interview with Mike O'Malley". WOMC. Retrieved February 2, 2011.
Wightman, Catriona (July 23, 2010). "Mike O'Malley becomes 'Glee' regular". Digital Spy. Hachette Filipacchi UK. Retrieved February 2, 2011. Frickative 20:50, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

These are much appreciated! HorrorFan121 (talk) 21:50, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great work on getting the article going! I started drafting one in my userspace last October, but in four months never got further than filling in the infobox, so those were just the sources that I never got round to using :D Frickative 12:26, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Burt Hummel/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Aranea Mortem (talk • contribs • count) 01:23, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

~~Unlink "musical" (it leads to musical film anyway) and comedy-drama. Per WP:OVERLINK.~~

Done.

Comedy-drama is still linked. Aranea Mortem ^{(talk to me)} 03:11, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. Sorry about that. I saw the quotes around "musical" and blipped right over comedy-drama. Fixed.

~~"From its fourth episode of..." from the fourth probs better and then remove the entitled and just put a comma: first season, "Preggers".~~

I opted for a slightly different solution that I think works. Let me know if you feel it still needs work.

~~"boor" is misspelled, bore.~~

This is correct, and a direct quote from the article besides. The word really is "boor".

IGN shouldn't be italicized.

We have been following MOS:ITALIC, which states: "Online magazines, newspapers, and news sites with original content should generally be italicized (such as Salon.com or The Huffington Post)." IGN is a news site site original content. I gather this is a comparatively recent change, but we've been doing our best to comply.

IGN is not a news site. It's a media/review website, if you doubt what I'm saying follow this link and look for yourself at how IGN is not italicized throughout, neither is this if you want to follow that too. Aranea Mortem ^{(talk to me)} 03:11, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Their website says "a casual news/reviews website". It has original content. That seemed clear to me. As for BuddyTV, "The website publishes information about celebrity and related entertainment news through a series of articles, entertainment profiles, actor biographies and user forums." Again, original content and articles. It isn't relevant whether they italicize themselves; what's relevant is the Wikipedia house style. How are they different from E! Online in this regard, or TVLine? I'd really like to understand this point, because in the task force we'd come to the conclusion that we should use italics for these sites after not having done so, given the wording of MOS:ITALIC. (And don't get me started on the ambiguity of when to use cite web vs. cite news templates, which isn't helped by the not quite consistent explanations depending upon which page you're reading.)

Wikipedia does not italicize IGN or BuddyTV because they aren't official news sites, they are websites dedicated to specific areas of media. Look everywhere, for every link to it, you'll find that they are not in italics. E! is an online cable network, TVLine is simply a website (which is why it doesn't get italics, it isn't a news-related capacity). I gave you a link to IGN, on that article, throughout, italics are not used for it, the same goes for BuddyTV. If you are ever in doubt about it, just follow the link for the medium and check it yourself. Aranea Mortem ^{(talk to me)} 04:13, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The italics are removed.

~~The first sentence of Storylines is the same as in the lede, could it be shortened and changed? Burt first appears in the episode "Preggers"?~~

Again, slightly different from your example, but shortened and changed.

IGN italics also occur below in critical response.

See above.

Now done.

BuddyTV shouldn't be in italics either. Only magazines and newspapers (EW, Time, TV Guide...) get italics, website based media doesn't.

Again, see above. By the rule as given in MOS:ITALIC, BuddyTV should be in italics.

Now done.

In the references, Glee is desperately overlinked. Keep the first instance of Glee in the refs and remove every other. As is Fox Broadcasting Company. Some of the directors and writers of the episodes are too. As is IGN (which is also in italics).

I'll work on that next, but I wanted the bulk of these to be seen by you right away. We haven't been dinged about this one before, so I wasn't aware it was a problem for the reference section. (I thought it might even be by design, but I've been wrong about that kind of thing many times before.)

Overlinking is always a problem, no matter where in the article, it just isn't necessary and should be removed. Aranea Mortem ^{(talk to me)} 03:11, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Done. I think I got all the extras, but if you see something, point it out and I'll take care of it.

The IGN italics here are an artifact of the "cite news" template, and are done automatically by that template.

Then it should be under publisher=, not work= if that's the case. Aranea Mortem ^{(talk to me)} 03:11, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

~~There's a free image of the actor, you could add it to the development section? That would colour up the article somewhat.~~

Done, even though O'Malley's only in profile, while Arroyo gets full-face treatment. (I looked through the photos from that event, which were the only ones of O'Malley on flickr that had a CC license available, and it's the best of the bunch. Alas.)

~~Could you indicate by means of "left" or "right" which one is the actor? Aranea Mortem ^{(talk to me)} 03:11, 14 September 2011 (UTC)~~[reply]

I did already. It says "(pictured, left)". Did you want something different? If the wording we usually use doesn't work, I'm happy to try something else.

Sorry, I don't know how I made that mistake. Aranea Mortem ^{(talk to me)} 04:13, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

~~This is not a reliable enough source to support the claim in the "Accolades" section, you should google for another one.~~

Done. E! Online had the full list.

~~Add an external links section and put in this.~~

I added the external links section, but used the "IMDb name" template for the purpose instead.

~~Please put this above the Glee template per the usual layout of articles. Aranea Mortem ^{(talk to me)} 03:11, 14 September 2011 (UTC)~~[reply]

Moved. Thanks.

~~Also you've somehow linked to Clark Gregg? That happened because you used the "name" section instead of "character", name is for living people, add this: * {{IMDb character|0163988|Burt Hummel}}~~

Thanks for the save. I put it in originally, it said "Burt Hummel at the Internet Movie Database", and I figured I'd done it correctly, because it pulled the right name by itself. It still says the same thing, but at least now the link works. Sorry about that.

~~Can an image be uploaded for this character? On a non-free media rationale?~~

As you can see, we used to have one, but it was deleted on us. Recent attempts to load images from the 2011 crop of Glee photos on Foxflash with the non-free media rationale have met similar fates within the last couple of weeks. They've gotten very restrictive. We've been resorting to photos from the Glee Live! In Concert! tour, but that only works for the characters on that tour, and that's only the student characters.

Fair enough, I'll let that slide then. Aranea Mortem ^{(talk to me)} 03:11, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. Thank you.

Very well written, with these suggested changes done I'll put a pass on it. Aranea Mortem ^{(talk to me)} 01:23, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! With the exception of the reference links, I believe I've addressed every issue you listed. I'll get to work on those reference link deletions right away. Please let me know if anything further is needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:56, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Still a bit more to do. Aranea Mortem ^{(talk to me)} 03:11, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As best I can determine, I've taken care of everything but the italics that I discussed above. If it's a deal-breaker, I'll fix them, but I'm really hoping to come out of this understand the dividing line because I'm working on other articles with an eye to submitting them for GAN. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:59, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The italics aren't a massive deal, but it is best to adhere to MoS amap in GAs, so as soon as you've done that, I'll pass it. Good work, Aranea Mortem ^{(talk to me)} 04:13, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They're all taken care of. Whew! Let me know if I've missed anything, but as far as I can tell, I've gotten them all. Thanks again for your help! BlueMoonset (talk) 04:46, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Burt Hummel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:39, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]