Talk:Frank Underwood (House of Cards)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleFrank Underwood (House of Cards) 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.
Did You Know Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 24, 2014Good article nomineeNot listed
February 19, 2014Good article reassessmentNot listed
March 28, 2014Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on August 1, 2013.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that this year, House of Cards' Frank and Claire Underwood were two of the first three Primetime Emmy Award-nominated web television leading roles and "Chapter 1" was the first webisode to earn such a nomination?
Current status: Good article

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: RESULT - withdrawn by nom. Nom following consensus below also moved English folk musician out of the primary slot to Frank Underwood (English musician) and requested admin Anthony Appleyard to move dab into primary slot. All good. (non-admin closure) In ictu oculi (talk) 10:32, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Frank Underwood (House of Cards)Frank Underwood – This article is by far the most popular usage of Frank Underwood. The page that occupies that namespace at the moment, Frank Underwood, is a very short article about a blues musician. In contrast, this article about the House of Cards protagonist is very clearly the primary topic for the name, and is even being considered for categorization as a Good Article. Page view statistics show that this article has had 51,930 views this month, while the article currently occupying the primary topic title has had only 1384 views this month, the chart indicating that the vast, vast majority of even these are as a result of confusion between it and this article. I am aware and sensitive to the fact that this may be confused with recentism, but the other article is about an elderly blues musician with little information, unlikely to be increasing in popularity. There is no doubt that this particular character's article is the primary topic and should be moved as such. There are no other articles about people named Frank Underwood other than this and the one currently occupying the primary topic title. Ithinkicahn (talk) 04:25, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

There is an RfC on the question of using "Religion: None" vs. "Religion: None (atheist)" in the infobox on this and other similar pages.

The RfC is at Template talk:Infobox person#RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion.

Please help us determine consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 02:09, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reception summary[edit]

@TonyTheTiger: I don't see how adding a summary of the critical reception of Spacey's portrayal and the character itself is vandalism, especially considering that there already was mention of accolades that Spacey received in the paragraph I added it in.Joef1234 (talk) 01:16, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I did not perceive the content that your removed as helpful to the article.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:48, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I think if we are going to add an awards summary, which is arguably apart of the critical reception, we should put a short critical synopsisJoef1234 (talk) 15:30, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I am removing the content until you can source it with a WP:IC from a WP:RS.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:37, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reception Length[edit]

Does anyone think that we should trim the reception length and/or maybe not by each season because each section (with maybe the exception of season three) is saying the same thing--Joef1234 (talk) 06:21, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Presidency[edit]

Underwood resigned from the office in season 5. Why it is not mentioned in the article? Is there any problem about it? UndDerDie (talk) 18:27, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Season 5 has not been included in his biography.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:00, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Categories[edit]

I have removed this from Category:House of Cards as it is already in Category:House of Cards (U.S. TV series) which is a sub category of the former.Dunarc (talk) 22:25, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Frank Underwood (House of Cards). 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) 11:24, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]