Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ed Wood, Jr.

Ed Wood, Jr.
The article has been cleaned up quite a lot since it was last submitted as a fac. I think that the filmmaker is a very important topic, and this entry examines quite nicely. (Ibaranoff24 04:17, 2 February 2006 (UTC))


 * Nominate and Support. (Ibaranoff24 04:17, 2 February 2006 (UTC))
 * Object needs references, and He is undoubtedly the best-known maker of z-grade movies in the entire history of Hollywood, famed for his ultra-low budget horror, science fiction and cowboy motion pictures is Pure POV in the lead, fix that. --Jaranda wat's sup 04:20, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Object Serious lack of references. Coffeeboy 17:35, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Object Lacking references and inline citations, weak sections nad prose. AndyZ 20:56, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment As already mentioned, this article desperately needs references and inline citations.  Some examples of statements which need references:
 * "It is reported that Wood's mother, Lillian, always wanted a girl and sometimes dressed young Ed up in skirts and dresses." If its reported, the source of the report should be there.
 * "He claimed that he had participated in the Battle of Guadalcanal while secretly wearing a brassiere and panties beneath his uniform." Again, if he's saying this, it should be sourced.
 * "If you want to know me, see 'Glen or Glenda'. That's me, that's my story, no question. But 'Plan 9' is my pride and joy. We used Cadillac hubcaps for flying saucers in that." That's directly attributed to Wood, so that'll definitely need a source.
 * Although his wearing a brassiere to battle might be interesting and true, as its not "common knowledge" it should be sourced. The best way to write the article is to assume that the reader knows nothing of Ed Wood.  Also, some of the later sections ("Last Days", "Tim Burton's Ed Wood", and "Cult Status") appear as stubs and probably should be expanded or moved into the main article.
 * I hope this helps! Good luck!--Ataricodfish 16:45, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Object -- Agree that the subject is notable, even important. It's a close call; there's a lot of good stuff in here. But there's too much filler and not enough meat; some passages are repeated. Need refs, as above. Need some more images, too; this is a movie guy. John Reid 07:43, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Object per above. Would make a great article in the future once more references are added though. Essexmutant 11:45, 6 February 2006 (UTC)