Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Seinfeld/archive2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Seinfeld[edit]

Great article, seems to match all criteria. Good use of images, sources are cited properly, and is overall a very informative, interesting read. Honestly, I'm surprised it hasn't been featured before. 64.135.205.238 18:50, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note This nomination was incorrectly placed on the page of another nomination: CM Punk. I went through the whole nomination procedure for this user. That is why my user name appears on all nomination procedure related pages. - Tutmosis 19:36, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose too large amount of unsourced material. The Filmaker 19:51, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I'm with The Filmaker- tons of unsourced claims. Just a few examples: "During the show's current syndictation run, it continually ranks in the syndication's top 10 programs list"; "In general, product placement became much more frequent in TV shows after Seinfeld demonstrated that a successful show could work specific products into its plots and dialogue" (which is currently tagged as needing citation); "The show divided even more of its audience in its final two seasons." There are also a ton of screenshots; I really don't think any article (no matter what its size) should have so many fair use images. In addition, the article failed to become a GA in July- perhaps work should go to making it good enough for that plateau first. -- Kicking222 22:16, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I liked this article last time it was nominated. I'll probably see this get snowballed, but I'll give it a support vote, as it is rather interesting. FireSpike 20:11, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Object Although length is not an FAC issue, it really is very very long. Maybe post-Seinfeld careers, DVD information and stuff like that could be even split into their own articles. The notable episodes section is so POV! The whole article actually reads like one fan's opinon; the 'notable' episodes, criticism, the ending etc etc. There are not nearly enough references, and a lot of images as well, stuff like the logos gallary is a bit of a fair-use stretch. And screenshots representing characters/cast would be better off without credits obscuring them (Newman's image)...Needs a lot of work. Seinfann 07:09, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Article too long, unsourced, most of it is fancruft, such as sections on The Soup Nazi,The Contest--Coasttocoast 03:12, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]