Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Gender Bender (The X-Files)/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 promoted by GrahamColm 09:14, 14 October 2012.

Gender Bender (The X-Files)

 * Nominator(s): GRAPPLE   X  00:46, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Although I'm sure you're all sick of looking at The X-Files by now, this one should be relatively brief. It's leaner than my past nominations but it's as comprehensive as the sources allow and isn't short by an objective standard, I guess. The article went through a GA review over a year ago, and has since been beefed up enough to pass an A-Class review recently. As always, I'll be on hand to offer prompt responses (though I will be absent from October 14 through to October 20). And if you need any incentive to take a look, sex-changing space Amish. Come on. GRAPPLE  X  00:46, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Image review
 * File:Peter Stebbings.jpg is fine.
 * Simple enough. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:15, 7 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Addressed comments from Crisco 1492 moved to talk


 * Support on prose, assuming comprehensiveness is there based on more experienced TV reviewers. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:18, 7 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Support I already reviewed this article for A-Class. It's a well-done article. TBrandley 02:59, 7 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment I think this could function as a proper lead image. The rationale is that it showcases the finale's twist and reveals the nature of the episode's antagonists as aliens, and also reveals a notable geographical event discussed in the article. It also visually articulates the episode's twist in a way that I don't believe prose could otherwise describe as well. That's my official suggestion unless anyone explicitly objects. Bruce Campbell (talk) 03:38, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Additional comment; lead doesn't mention the critical reception of the episode nor that it received analysis for its themes. That's not always required but the themes and reception sections make up a quarter of the article. Bruce Campbell (talk) 17:08, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Added some now. GRAPPLE   X  17:46, 7 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Support Otherwise, I've reviewed the article's comprehensiveness here, it's gone through a thorough semi-peer review here and underwent prose concerns previously in the FAC. Bruce Campbell (talk) 03:38, 7 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Support I helped review this for A-class, and it is excellent. I'd also be willing to do spotchecks in a few days.-- Gen. Quon   (Talk)   16:36, 7 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Note: This is a WikiCup nomination. The following nominators are WikiCup participants: Grapple X. To the nominator: if you do not intend to submit this article at the WikiCup, feel free to remove this notice. UcuchaBot (talk) 00:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Comments:
 * The episode was inspired by producer Glen Morgan's desire for "an episode with more of a sexy edge"; however the writers found it difficult to write a story that showed sex as scary.

There should be a comma after however (it's a conjunctive adverb).
 * Added. GRAPPLE   X  17:19, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * This resemblance was used to include a scene showing Twa morphing into Stebbings; however Goodwin later felt that the similarity between the two actors prevented the effect from being readily apparent, "zapp[ing] the energy out of the moment".

Same as above.
 * Added. GRAPPLE   X  17:19, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Producer James Wong felt that the episode's ending seemed overly abrupt and unexpected, describing it as appearing "like we tried to play a trick on the audience to make them say 'Ooh, what the heck was that?'".

Use ' " at the end of this sentence, and I don't think you need a period there.
 * Added the template, but I'm not convinced about losing the full stop. The source gives a full stop after the quote, and I'm inclined the agree; the question mark is inside a quote inside the quote (if you follow me) and isn't intended to end the sentence as a question. GRAPPLE   X  17:19, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see what you mean. Cliff Smith 21:24, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * In his book The Nitpicker's Guide for X-Philes, author Phil Farrand has highlighted several inconsistencies in the episode; focusing on the implausible nature of the ending.

The semicolon should be a comma (focusing on the implausible nature of the ending is a dependent clause). Minor comments, as you can see. Cliff Smith 20:41, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure, fixed. I'm awful at these. GRAPPLE   X  17:19, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Could the lone note about the different title spelling be integrated into the article somehow? Maybe like the alternate title at Pilot (House).
 * This came up at the ACR too; I think it's not really worth inserting into the prose as it's essentially just a spelling variant, rather than an alternate title. The example you give is similar to how I had handled the alternate titles for Twin Peaks episodes (see "Episode 2", for example) but in each of those cases the two titles are genuinely different. If you still think it's worth a mention in the article's prose I could probably insert it under the "broadcast and reception" heading with the sources and just as a secondary title in the lead (like those in William the Conqueror I guess). GRAPPLE   X  17:19, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * It's not a big deal. I can understand the fact it's not really an alternate title or something like that being justification for a note as opposed to a mention in the prose. Cliff Smith 21:24, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Indopug has below suggested possibly removing it; how would you feel about that instead? GRAPPLE   X  21:16, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll leave it up to you. Cliff Smith 17:07, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time to review this one. GRAPPLE   X  17:19, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. I'm just leaving the comments up so that you can see my replies before I move all that to the talk page. Cliff Smith 21:24, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

One of the few times my opinion of an X-Files episode seems to match the critics. This really should've been a two-parter to bring all the threads to a close.
 * Comments
 * Is the "Genderbender" note necessary at all? (I see it as just a minor misspelling)
 * If yes, can it be moved to Footnotes like a regular reference so that you don't an entire section for it?
 * In answer to both, I suppose I could be convinced to lose it if it's deemed too trivial, but I'd rather keep it separate from the references as I've never been keen on mixing explanatory notes with refs; as a reader, I would read any notes to an article when I scroll that far, but I'd never read the references unless I want to verify something. If anyone else wants to second removal I'll cut it, though. GRAPPLE   X  21:16, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * The date of release needs to be as close to the top as possible (people who've never heard of the show need to know that it's 1994 and not 1974 or something).
 * Moved to first paragraph. GRAPPLE   X  21:16, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * "however, the writers found it difficult to write a story that showed sex as scary. The exterior shots of the village inhabited"—abrupt!
 * What is it you'd like addressed—sentence length or movement from one subject to another? GRAPPLE   X  21:16, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * The latter.—indopug (talk) 02:12, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Removed the line about filming locations. It lessens the number of subjects discussed, and doesn't make things too brief as that paragraph had grown a bit beefy anyway when I had added the thematic material. How does it look now? GRAPPLE   X  02:21, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * But Amish needs to be there. You can probably use something first para of Production. Either how they introduced them to resolve the difficulty of writing or how they contrasted the staid Kindred with the bustling nightlife.—indopug (talk) 03:05, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Added a little bit back in about the Amish-ish Kindred. GRAPPLE   X  04:38, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Replace a few "episode"s with "Gender Bender".
 * Done. GRAPPLE   X  21:16, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * "supernatural element to their touch" - any way of enforcing that you mean the literal touch? (and not like "a touch of elegance")
 * Reworded to directly state physical touch. GRAPPLE   X  21:16, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Add more pics: either the Amish or a crop circle or one of the creators.
 * Added a picture of some Amish people in the "Broadcast and reception" heading with a caption using Carter's "they don't watch TV quote". GRAPPLE   X  21:16, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * "In addition, an interior set constructed . . . Duchovny over an extra day" complicated sentence. I suggest breaking down into smaller ones.
 * Split. GRAPPLE   X  21:16, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * "changing gender roles of the decade" - can you elaborate on this? How did they change in the 90s?—indopug (talk) 13:47, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Source doesn't go into any detail on it, unfortunately. I assume that, given the episode's content, it's to do with the increasing normalcy of both genders as equal sexual partners and the notion that both are sexually forward and active (we open with a woman picking a man up in a bar for casual sex, something which I'm sure The Outer Limits wouldn't have touched during its time). And as for this one being a two parter, I always felt it should have just been two episodes (shape-shifting sexual predator and Amish from space just each seem like their own things. Bit like how Predator is a brilliant Commando-esque war film until that alien shows up to ruin it). Thanks for taking the time to review this one though. GRAPPLE   X  21:16, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Support Congrats on another FA!—indopug (talk) 02:12, 12 October 2012 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.