Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Concerned/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 by User:SandyGeorgia 02:29, 2 October 2008.

Concerned

 * Nominator(s): Diego_pmc  Talk

The article passed through GA and PR, and I decided to nominate it for FA status, and see what improvements it could use. Diego_pmc Talk 09:55, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Support. I reviewed this recently at Peer review/Concerned/archive1 and have no outstanding concerns. Nicely done. Giggy (talk) 09:59, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

comment - With the exception of Image:Concerned logo.png, I can't see any of the images passing WP:NFCC Fasach Nua (talk) 10:34, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * As you can see I tried to make detailed descriptions of their purposes, and I think they meet the criteria. Especially when they are all all used with permission. I don't think FU can get any better than when you have permission to use the image. Besides that, they are not excessive either, and they are appropriate to the sections they are in. Diego_pmc  Talk 16:12, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * As the images use Valve's textures for generating the comics, they are still derivative works and thus are non-free - the artist's permission is nice, but doesn't make this a magic bullet to bypass other concerns. That stated, I think only one image (outside the logo) really helps here: the Counterstrike crossover is purely decorative, so I'd stick with the second one (the floating can one).  --M ASEM  13:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I forgot they are originally from HL2. Okay, I removed the CS:S one. Diego_pmc  Talk 20:23, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Comments
 * What makes the following reliable sources?
 * http://www.ggl.com/
 * http://www.joystiq.com/2006/11/02/joystiq-interview-concerneds-chris-livingston/
 * http://web.archive.org/web/20060316095143/http://www.primotechnology.com/index.php?art=articles/0306/hlcomic/index.htm
 * Current ref 27 (Concerned 2 ...) is lacking a publisher.
 * Otherwise sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 11:59, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I found those three sources on Livingston's site, so it's pretty safe to assume the interviews are not altered in any way. About #27, there really is no publisher, but I put "Norman N. Black" in the author field. Diego_pmc  Talk 15:45, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * That'll prove they aren't altered, yep! Ealdgyth - Talk 13:51, 25 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment It would be nice to see more independent sources. Right now the majority of them are from Concerned itself. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  16:26, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * All sources from hlcomic.com are used to cite either important comments of Livingston (for example that he won't continue through HL2: Ep1), or various points from the plot, and in either case hlcomic.com is the most reliable source for these purposes. The two sections that absolutely must avoid hlcomic.com as much as possible (Reception and Publication History), only use the site few times, and only for claims such as those described above (plot or the author's claims).  Diego_pmc  Talk 16:37, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Just a note, although at a glance, it might look like there are 90% primary sources, because Christopher Livingston is listed first, that's a side effect of using cite interview, which puts the interviewee's name first. This means that some secondary sources do look like Livingstone is the author, when he isn't. -- Sabre (talk) 16:43, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Question - Should titles such as "half-Life 2" be italicized in quotes, or should they be left the way they were in the original quote? Diego_pmc  Talk 19:58, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Italicise them, they are titles regardless of whether they are in a quote or not. -- Sabre (talk) 20:06, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think there's a set rule either way, but I agree with Sabre. Giggy (talk) 22:56, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Oppose about the primary sources. If it's just plot, we can remove the citations (current ref 16), but using it for themes smacks of WP:OR and synthesis. The plot section is unintelligible to someone who has never played the game, and the prose throughout needs some serious work ("Frohman this. Frohman that", " However, Frohman falls right onto Breen, killing Breen.") -- Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 12:03, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

The statements made in the Themes section are not WP:OR. The author mentioned in his notes to what aspect of the game he made reference to in his comic - I should have included refs to the notes as well. Also about the prose from Plot section, it was already written when I started working on the article, and all i did was to remove some redundant details - I did not pay attention to repetitions.

I will try to address these issues in a couple of days. I don't understand what you meant when you said that the plot section is "unintelligible to someone who has never played the game", though. That it is a spoiler, or that it is confusing for someone unfamiliar with the game? In either case, I tend to disagree with you. WP is not censored, as I'm sure you know, so spoilers are accepted, and it doesn't seem confusing either - you only need to understand what's happening, not to actually be able to make the connection between the events in the comic, and those from the game. Diego_pmc Talk 19:41, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Support - I have only one nitpick &mdash; could you please remove the redundant phrases? &mdash; Sunday  ·  (Testify!)  13:56, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.