Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hawaii Five-0 (2010 TV series)/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 archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 06:01, 20 December 2017.

Hawaii Five-0 (2010 TV series)

 * Nominator(s): TheDoctorWho (talk) 21:45, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

This article is about the police procedural reboot Hawaii Five-0. The show features an elite state task force that solves extensive crimes on the island. This article has recently gone through extensive work to become a Good article and I believe that with hard work and determination I can help this become a featured article too. TheDoctorWho (talk) 21:45, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi TheDoctor, welcome. Unfortunately I think this article is still well short of FA-ready, so I'm going to have to oppose at this point. Some examples of issues to address:
 * Given the length of the article, the lead should be considerably longer
 * I think a more comprehensive survey of the literature would help round out the article - for example, see here regarding economic impact to Hawaii
 * Suggest reorganizing the article to improve logical flow and reduce or eliminate very short subsections, like the one on the car (see also MOS:TV)
 * Citation formatting should be made more consistent
 * The cast photo needs a fuller FUR to justify why this particular image is key to reader understanding
 * There are stylistic issues throughout the article - for example, repeated links, misuse of italics. While I appreciate that you're wikilinking the acronyms in the Plot section, I think it would be more helpful to rewrite the section to avoid needing so many of them. Another example is the main cast section - you start out with a "Name. Short description." style, but midway through switch to a "Name, description" style. This should be consistent.
 * Some of the prose could use editing for clarity and flow. For example, in the lead: "originally an in-name-only unit of but folded into CBS Television Studios" - took me a couple of reads to understand what this meant, and the implication of "in-name-only" is still unclear to me. Another example is the first crossover desccription: "Joe White calls in Agent Kensi Blye from NCIS: Los Angeles Office to review the video of John McGarrett, Governor Jameson, and Wo Fat for Steve, but only recognizes the word "Shelburne"." - it's really unclear to me what this is intended to convey. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:30, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

I will unfortunately have to agree with Nikkimaria on this; I just do not think that this is prepared for FAC. A peer review may be helpful for this though. I can see large portions of the article that are not cited at all, such as the "Premise" section and a majority of the "Broadcast and streaming" section, and that is a pretty big red flag for me. Aoba47 (talk) 03:12, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose from Aoba47

Coord note -- based on the above commentary, and my own spotcheck of the article overall, I concur that this well-intentioned nom is premature, so I'll be archiving it shortly; I hope the points above are taken on board, including the suggestion of a PR, and that we see the article back at FAC in due course. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:00, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 06:01, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.