Talk:The Mysterons

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleThe Mysterons 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
DateProcessResult
June 30, 2010Good article nomineeListed

Untitled[edit]

The World President also appears in Spectrum Strikes Back.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.174.125 (talk • contribs) 19:13, 15 March 2010

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Mysterons (Captain Scarlet episode)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: BelovedFreak 21:21, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
    yes
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
    no problems here
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    no problems here
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

I enjoyed reading the article - about a topic I am completely unfamiliar with! It's very close to GA with just a few issues to sort. The main problems, as I see it, are: a bit of overlinking, a bit of over-citing and a little clarification needed for those of us that are not familiar with the series. In some places there are too far too many citations. Some sentences you have three citations to the same source, which is not necessary. In other places you have two or three citations for a single sentence that could perhaps be backed up by just one source. You don't need to cite every sentence. Sometimes one cite a paragraph is ok, although you need more if there is a mixture of sources. Too many citations makes it more difficult to read, especially when they're appearing in the middle of sentences. As far as linking goes, make sure that you only link to articles that will help a reader to understand this article, that provide context or more relevant information. I'll go through each section in more detail:

  • I hope that the situation appears better now. SuperMarioMan 03:02, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Lead and infobox
  • I'm not sure that you need so many citations in the lead. Generally, citations are only included in the lead to back up particularly contentious details; anything likely to be challenged by the casual reader.
    • I have removed some of these. Others remain on the rationale that the appearance of production details (such as the start of filming), even within the lead section, may well prompt readers to enquire to themselves about attribution, and that it would be better to present a source for such factual detail immediately within the text rather than oblige them to read through the rest of the article first. SuperMario Man 03:02, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'll agree to disagree on this one. I still don't think you need all of those, but it's not a GA requirement, so it's up to you!--BelovedFreak 09:50, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Likewise, the infobox shouldn't need those three citations; they are all repeated in the text. Is there any reason to keep them? ie. do you think that they are backing up facts that the reader will immediately want to challenge?
  • Perhaps you could make it clear who or what the Mysterons are? Maybe just preface it with "alien race" or whatever is appropriate.
  • "The episode... was also recommended during a repeat run on BBC Two in 1993" - please state who recommended (ie. critics)
  • There's no need to link Earth
  • Does "repeat run" need to be linked?
Plot
  • Do you need to link 2068; it redirects to 2060s - do you think that article provides relevant context to this one?
  • You could perhaps link "surface of mars" as all one link to geography of Mars, which in turn links to Mars anyway.
  • Is Martian Exploration Vehicle right? The Zero-X article states that it is a Martian Excursion Vehicle. Or does it not matter?
    • It is definitely the first. I have corrected the error in the Zero-X article. SuperMarioMan 03:02, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Again, Earth doesn't need to be linked
  • "the officers are killed ... and are reconstructed" - is there any way of making it clearer what they're reconstructed as?
  • Colonel White is introduced suddenly, it might help to specify who he is. Likewise, Captain Blue and the Angels (particularly as the latter aren't wikilinked)
  • I don't think you need to link "concealed on his person"
  • Could you clarify what Cloudbase is?
  • Don't need to link "English"
  • "Observed by Captain Black, Scarlet awaits the arrival of Spectrum Helicopter A42, which has been hijacked by the Mysterons and fires on Blue" - who fires on Blue? Scarlet or the helicopter?
  • "Later, the reconstruction of Scarlet returns to life, no longer under Mysteron control and now apparently "indestructible"" - this is a little unclear. "the reconstruction returns to life". I'm not sure what to suggest but I'm not completely clear what's going on.
    • I have attempted to clarify the more esoteric points of the plot, as recommended. My concern is the length of the summary: approximately 500 words for a 25-minute episode (double the length as guidelines suggest, the recommendation being 10 words per minute of screentime, hence approximately 250 words in this case). I was attempting to keep the plot section as short as possible by excluding expository text, but it is necessary for some readers, as pointed out. There is convoluted plotting for such a short runtime, and some sequences are difficult to describe both concisely and comprehensibly (the Mars sequences in particular). As the plot is rather complicated, I feel that the longer summary is justified, but others may disagree. SuperMarioMan 03:02, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks for clarifying it a bit. The summary is a little long for an episode, but I think that stories like these need a bit of extra explaining due to the unreal aspects that some readers will be unfamiliar with. I also think it warrants a bit extra as it's the first ever episode of the series. Later episode articles may not need summaries this long.--BelovedFreak 09:50, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Production
  • "...Gerry and Sylvia Anderson, who generally wrote the first episode ..." - "generally" is a little vague, can that be any clearer?
  • Do you need to link guest role?
Broadcasting
  • Could this heading be renamed as Broadcast? It sounds a little neater
  • You don't need to link London here. I'm not sure you need to link it at all, but at this point, it's already been linked
Reception
  • could you state who Francis Matthews is?
  • Could you state the date of the BBFC classification?
References
  • Print sources should be in italics, non-print sources not in italics. I've fixed these.
  • Is tvcentury21.com a reliable source? Is it official?
    • In the absence of an official site dedicated to Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons, tvcentury21.com is probably the closest substitute. Its articles and other information are regularly updated. The citation to this site (the music recording schedule) is used elsewhere, including the main series article, where no issues were taken with its reliability during that article's GA review. SuperMarioMan 03:02, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Ok, and I see that it's not being questioned at the FAC for that article, so I'm happy with that.--BelovedFreak 09:50, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
General

Is there a reason for formatting the dates as Month Day, Year? As a British topic it owuld make sense to format dates as Day Month Year. (WP:STRONGNAT)

A final point: is the title for the article correct? Per naming conventions for television episodes it should be The Mysterons (Captain Scarlet); was this a conscious choice to avoid confusion with the article about the Mysterons?

I'll place the article on hold to allow these issues to be addressed. Please feel free to ask any questions or argue any of the above points!--BelovedFreak 21:21, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, good work, I'm happy to list it as a Good Article. I'll leave the article naming issue with you. Good luck with its further development.--BelovedFreak 09:50, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for the approval! On the naming, I believe that no disambiguation is actually required at all, since there is no other topic on Wikipedia titled "The Mysterons". The problem is that there is a redirect page using that name (linking to the article "Mysteron"), so this episode article is impossible to move at the moment without administrator assistance (which I am currently seeking). Otherwise, thank you very much for this review. SuperMarioMan 00:18, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page not moved. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 18:26, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Mysterons (Captain Scarlet episode) → The Mysterons as a plain move: no histmerge needed

  • Request moved from Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen by Anthony Appleyard (talk) at 09:56, 30 June 2010 (UTC) :-[reply]
    • I'm not sure that this is the best venue for this kind of request, but it does involve possible history merging. The title "The Mysterons" has existed as a redirect to the article "Mysteron" since December 2006. An episode with an identical name is currently titled "The Mysterons (Captain Scarlet episode)", which uses unnecessary disambiguation. It is impossible to remove the disambiguation and rename the episode article as "The Mysterons" (no other Wikipedia subject by that name exists, so no precision is needed, at least as far as I can tell) since the page already exists as a redirect. A history merge appears to be required here. However, the redirect "The Mysterons" has only one edit in its history (the action which moved it to the title "Mysteron"), and its talk page is uncreated, in which case would it be simpler just for an administrator to delete the redirect, after which I could move the episode page and get rid of the unneeded disambiguation? This seems to be a quicker and easier approach. I would add the "For" template to the top of the episode page to substitute for the deleted redirect. Sorry if this is not the right place to post a request of this sort, but I couldn't think of where else to ask. Thanks. SuperMarioMan 23:58, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Or leave page The Mysterons (Captain Scarlet episode) where it is, to clearer distinguish the episode from the fictional aliens? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:58, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the antagonists for the entire programme is more likely usage than an individual episode. The TV show is called "Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons". 76.66.195.196 (talk) 20:19, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Query: Which page should be history-merged with page Mysteron? The Mysterons (Captain Scarlet episode) and Mysteron are WP:Parallel versions. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:26, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have redirected The Mysterons to the existing disambig page Mysterons. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:32, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The disambiguation is necessary. Fences&Windows 13:48, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: It is true, actually, that the disambiguation would help navigation. The hatnote in the Mysteron article has been modified following the new redirect but still points to the episode article. The situation is resolved. SuperMarioMan 16:41, 9 July 2010 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on The Mysterons. 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) 02:31, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Mysterons. 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) 23:27, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Mysterons. 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) 19:30, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Mysterons&oldid=1205282937"