Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/I Never Liked You/archive2


 * 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 Laser brain via FACBot (talk) 21:34, 5 February 2015 (UTC).

I Never Liked You

 * Nominator(s): Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 11:28, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

An awkwardness that would make the merely awkward feel awkward is at the heart of Chester Brown's third graphic novel. It is a significant early development in the history of the form, and in contrast with the dense formal boundary-pushing of Maus, High Society, or Poison River, I Never Liked You is so minimalist that those who didn't know better might think the cartooning that of an incompetent draughtsman.

This nominee died of neglect in its first FAC—hopefully it'll die a more valiant death this round. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 11:28, 4 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Comments

This is mostly there.
 * The word Chet is used 33 times in Synopsis.
 * Now cut down to 11. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:30, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I think the synopsis should be rewritten by incorporating the characters into it. Currently there are two problems, 1) that Synopsis misses out on some key details, such as the religiousness and the mother's fall, and 2) the Characters section is too repetitive (esp Chet, Sky and Connie). Unlike in Maus, the characters section here carries no new major insight missing in the synopsis, expect maybe about Chet's mother.
 * You're right. How does it read now? Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:30, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
 * How long is the book, page-wise?
 * Depends on the edition. Unlike most comics, Brown's can vary in pagecount. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:30, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
 * A range then? Or the New Definitive Edition pagecount? (in the infobox) My point is that I want to know whether the book is 100 pages long or 1000. The article/infobox gives me no clue about that.
 * I sympathize, but I'd rather go with nothing than something potentially misleading. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 01:33, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
 * You should clarify that Yummy Fur is a comic-book series. Even Action Comics is described that way.
 * Isn't a comic book a series unless otherwise stated? Especially if it's introduced as having issues. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:30, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Awkward phrasing: "It also received criticism who saw it", "with what became his previous book".
 * Forgot a "from those"; cut out "what became". Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:30, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I think you should use the original book cover.—indopug (talk) 14:41, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not so sure. If the image is supposed to help identify the work, then I don't think the cover of an obscure out-of-print early edition with different formatting is going to be helpful to readers (only to obsessive collectors). Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:30, 4 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the copyedit and the review! Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:30, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Btw, ref 38 for "hide with me" is unnecessary. The ref at the end is enough.—indopug (talk) 16:51, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Support all of my concerns have been addressed.—indopug (talk) 16:51, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot! Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 08:56, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Comments from RL0919
I hate the "died from neglect" result -- very frustrating. So here's some low hanging fruit on the sources to help you out before someone does a more detailed review: More comments after I actually read it. --RL0919 (talk) 23:00, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Citation 34 includes Harvard ref for "Gravett & Thompson 2004". There doesn't seem to be any such source in the list, although there is a source from Gravett and a source from Thompson.
 * I screwed up the template. Fixed. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 02:33, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * There are web sources for Paquin and for Williams, neither of whom appear to be cited inline or mentioned anywhere in the body. Are these superfluous?
 * Fixed these (dropped Paquin and restored inlines for Williams). Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 02:33, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 02:33, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * The Gravett/Thompson ref is still broken. From the history it looks like you partially fixed it, then reverted. --RL0919 (talk) 19:04, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * How did I muff that? Refixed. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 22:42, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Having re-read after the further revisions discussed below, I'm happy to support. --RL0919 (talk) 18:04, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Images are appropriately licensed and captioned. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:27, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Gerda
(Also here because the death from neglect, and new to the topic:) I like a lot!


 * Synopsis: I find a bit strange that the younger brother is given a name a while after "sons" were mentioned, - also that "excuse after excuse" doesn't belong to the mother's death mentioned just before.
 * You're right. I've reworded. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:35, 8 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Background:
 * As a reader unfamiliar with it, I would prefer to see it before the synopsis.
 * Sure. Moved. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:35, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Image caption: I would prefer to see Seth mentioned sooner, because without reading I would have expected an image of Brown.
 * I'd love to put a picture of Brown there instead, but the only images we have of him are bald ones (he had way long hair when he made the book). I've moved the image down a paragraph---is that better? Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:35, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, now it's across a header. I don't mind, but others might. How about moving it back but caption: "Seth ..., a fellow ..."? ---GA
 * Hmmm ... can you show me what you mean? Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 22:29, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
 * The image is partly in the following paragraph. I don't mind, but I have seen review purists ... - Current caption "The artwork of fellow Toronto cartoonist Seth inspired Brown to simplify his own." My suggestion (to be polished): Seth was fellow Toronto cartoonist, whose artwork inspired Brown to simplify his own. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:02, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
 * What do you think of it now? Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:10, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Like it ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:16, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you ;) Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:27, 11 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Reception ...: The image would look better on the left, facing "in". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:54, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Shifted to the left. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:35, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for stopping by! Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:35, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for acting. Will read once more, but may take a few days, vacation ... ---Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:01, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Second round:

Lead
 * the term impressionistic, - it seems to have nothing to do with Impressionism, but what is it then? If a quote, it should be marked as such and explained.
 * Right. The sources use "impressionistic", but I suspect they mean that as a synonym for "loose".  I've drpped "impressionistic". Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 22:32, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I need two readings each time for the sentence starting with "Unhappy" and including "too complex" ;)
 * I've recast it. How does it read now? Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 22:32, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
 * In "I Never Liked You has had a positive reception", I don't like "has had" too much.
 * Dropped "has". Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 22:32, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
 * The last sentence about the background seems a bit out of place in "reception".

Synopsis
 * "its author Chester Brown's adolescence" reads strange, - and now that it isn't the beginning any more, could be simplified to "its author's adolescence"
 * Done. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 22:32, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Style ...
 * "is amongst the simplest and sparsest in Brown's body of work" could go to the lead as well
 * Done. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 22:32, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

That's it. Good read, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:03, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, thank you very much! The book's a good read, too (and there's also a German edition—under the original title Fuck). Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 22:32, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Support from my end, like it! You could add a separate infobox for the book edition, as in Der Kontrabaß. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:47, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks you! The Infobox Graphic novel actually combines both series and book into the same infobox. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 22:56, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Now I see. The chronology made me miss it ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:40, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
 * The template could be better formatted. Maybe someday I'll make a proposal myself. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 03:14, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Ceoil
I will be supporting this, thought it was ready at the first nom.
 * Originally serialized as Fuck in issues #26–30 of Brown's comic book Yummy Fur in 1991–93, it was published in book form by Drawn and Quarterly in 1994. a bit tortured.
 * Does it read better as "The story first appeared from 1991 to 1993 under the tite Fuck in issues # of Brown's comic book Yummy Fur; it was published in book form by Drawn and Quarterly in 1994."? Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 22:29, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
 * It does. Ceoil (talk) 01:35, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * The story deals with the teenage Brown's introversion and difficulty talking to others, especially members of the opposite sex—including his mother, to whom he is unable to express affection even as she lies in the hospital dealing with her schizophrenia. - "deals with" twice, plus long long sentence.
 * I've dropped "dealing with her schizophrenia" entirely; it shouldn't have been there in the first place since it's not made explicit in the story itself. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 22:29, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Ceoil (talk) 17:33, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Brown rearranged the page layouts in the book edition. ie the 1994 reprint we just mentioned?
 * That's right. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 02:36, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * black behind all the panels - the page backgrounds, maybe.
 * Right---the non-panel portions of the page were entirely black. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 02:36, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * conforming to the shapes of the pictures they enclosed in a wobbly free-hand - hard to parse
 * Is it better now? Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 02:36, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * The layout and repetition of panels affects pacing, slowing or quickening scene - should this be a scene that slows or quickens the pace of the narrative. Maybe reword the first half as "The layout and repetition of panels is used to establish pace"
 * I kind of struggled with this, because as a statement it's true of all comics, but it's more obvious in this book because of the unusual layout, and even more obvious if you can compare the serial to the finished book. The finished book feels more naturally paced than the serial did, even though the panels appear in the same sequential order. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 02:36, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Hugh Hefner wrote to Brown voicing concern that Brown would feel such guilt in a post-sexual revolution world - such guilt?
 * Guilt over masturbating over pictures of naked women. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 02:36, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * During hide-and-seek games he often hides from the others in the tall grass and talks with Carrie's older sister Connie - is he talking to Connie during hide and seek? Ceoil (talk) 01:25, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, they'd hide together where they knew they wouldn't be found and talk until the others got bored of the game. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 02:36, 18 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I've gone through this with c/e's a few times, my quibbles resolved, and am a support now here. Another fine article from mr Turkey. Ceoil (talk) 06:54, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Merci bien! Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 08:56, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

All sources appear to be of appropriate quality and reliability, and are properly and consistently formatted. Brianboulton (talk) 13:36, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Sources review

-- Laser brain  (talk)  21:34, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.