Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/It's Elementary: Talking About Gay Issues in School/archive1

It's Elementary: Talking About Gay Issues in School

 * Nominator(s): SL93 (talk) 19:37, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

This article is about a documentary that focuses on LGBTQ topics being taught in schools. The article has passed GA. An editor left a few suggestions on the article talk page that I tried to complete. Another editor did mention that some FA reviewers are only interested in articles that are very long. I do feel that if the article is not long enough, it is close to reaching that as an article about a documentary. It was suggested to me by another editor to look at similar FA film articles so I did and the closest thing that I could find is Trembling Before G-d that passed FA in 2010. I was hoping to find something more recent. I doubt that Trembling Before G-d would pass a FA review in 2022. SL93 (talk) 19:37, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Image review—pass one correctly licensed fair use image (t &#183; c)  buidhe  22:31, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The image is correctly licensed, but the caption isn't super descriptive? The image also has no alt. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 10:13, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The caption is no different than other featured film articles. What do you mean by alt? SL93 (talk) 00:03, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Robert E. Murray (crop).jpg
 * alt text is a broad descriptor of an image that is meant to provide information for screen readers. For example, this image of Bob Murray contains the alt text "Bald, old white man with oxygen tubes extending from his nose around his head". theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 00:16, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I think I took care of it. SL93 (talk) 01:18, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Source review
Version review :D
 * Newspapers.com should be linked (Newspapers.com), as well as all publishers and newspapers and the like that can be linked.
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 23:10, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Make sure you're consistent about whether or not you're using ISSNs
 * Done. I removed it. SL93 (talk) 01:07, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Books should be cited with page numbers
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:32, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Ref 2: Are you sure the paper set the school in NY state and not NYC? Given that the other three are cities, I think it's talking about NYC.
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:13, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The article states "that the film would be broadcast on around 60 PBS stations." Ref 9, which is cited, appears to say "at least 60".
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 23:13, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Ref 5 and ref 8 appear to cite the same book—possibly create a "works cited" subsection of books and use sfn to cite page numbers?
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:32, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Ref 7 describes the short version as 37 minutes long, not 38 (pedantry at it's finest)—maybe say "just under 40 minutes" if there's no consensus on that? If there is a consensus for 38, probably cite the short version length to something else.
 * I changed it to "just under 40 minutes" and removed the minutes for the cut version from the infobox. Is that fine? SL93 (talk) 01:12, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
 * yep! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 00:29, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Ref 9 doesn't seem to support "The special features are deleted scenes, an interview with the director"
 * Done. Source added. SL93 (talk) 01:22, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Ref 12 is a deadlink; Consider running IABot
 * It opened for me. IABot shows no dead links. SL93 (talk) 00:31, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
 * it redirects me to the baltimore sun's homepage—i meant run IABot to add archive links? (you'll have to go through and make sure it formats the dates correctly) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 00:29, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:18, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Neither ref 16 nor ref 17 claim that Bob Smith was especially angry, although it does give significant reason why he would be.
 * I didn't add that to the article and I have no idea how to fix the issue. Maybe I could just remove it. SL93 (talk) 23:20, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * smith doesn't seem irrelevant, I wouldn't cut it entirely; I just wouldn't say he was "especially provoked". theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 00:30, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I think this is done. SL93 (talk) 01:18, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Refs 16 and 17 should be marked as "subscription required"
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 23:18, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The sentence that begins with "The Frameline Film Festival said that the" should be cited to ref 19, not 18
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 23:12, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Ref 20: Are you talking about this slideshow? If so, that should be put in a clear citation format (and probably linked). However, if there isn't a secondary source to corroborate that, I'd recommend against including it; since secondary sources are what we use to figure out what's important, and since Olsen isn't an academic or subject-matter expert on her own, I don't see a clear reason to include the associated fact.
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 23:12, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * A couple of sources spell the second director's name as "Helene"—I think there's still a consensus that's not actually her name, but possibly mention that?
 * I would rather not mention it because it isn't her name. SL93 (talk) 00:31, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Fair enough :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 00:24, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The cite web template is used 12 times; I'm not sure it's appropriate in all of those instances. Make sure you're not using cite web for newspapers, magazines, etc.
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:18, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh, sorry, one more thing; make sure you're consistent about whether you're using title case or sentence case in sourcing (if you want to use sentence case for newspapers/websites, you may want to start separating sources by type) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 01:31, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm confused. I just copy and pasted the titles from the sources. SL93 (talk) 01:40, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * in general, it's better to use a consistent article citation style rather than copy the capitalization used from the article. So, if you want to use title case, e.g. "Titanic Sinks Four Hours After Hitting Iceberg", use that consistently throughout the article; if you want so use sentence case, e.g. "Titanic sinks four hours after hitting iceberg", use that consistently instead. MOS:SMALLCAPS is kind of a guideline here? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 02:07, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 02:23, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, SL93! this has my support :D great work! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 02:30, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Other comments
General
 * I'd recommend using "gay" as an adjective rather than an noun (e.g. "gay men deserve the right to marry" versus "gays deserve the right to marry) unless it's a direct quote—some perceive it as mildly offensive/dehumanizing. See WikiProject LGBT studies/Guidelines theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 08:06, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 22:33, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Background
 * The list of cities comes out a little weird; why separate with semicolons?
 * Possibly rephrase to "The schools are in San Francisco and New York City, as well as Madison, Wisconsin and Cambridge, Massachusetts."
 * Done. I was actually told to use semicolons by the Good Article reviewer. SL93 (talk) 22:33, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Synopsis
 * "encourages her students to brainstorm on the words "gay" and "lesbian," and to talk about the roots of their associations, assumptions, and attitudes": quotes within quotes should be single-quoted (i just said quote a lot)
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 22:36, 10 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "about gay and lesbians" should be fixed either way
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 22:36, 10 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "The educators of the toured elementary and middle schools were teaching about homosexuality to their students in multiple ways." I'd recommend "The teachers that were surveyed had varying methods of educating about homosexuality". Some of it's stylistic, some of it's "technically correct", I just think it flows better.
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 22:57, 10 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "a man and a woman who are homosexual" per the same guideline up above, "homosexual" usually isn't fantastic to use—probably "a gay man and a lesbian woman"?
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 22:53, 10 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "The film includes similar situations in other classrooms" I read that to mean similar to the last example—clarify?
 * Done. I decided to list all of the situations in the article from that source. SL93 (talk) 01:50, 11 January 2022 (UTC)


 * You also probably want to make it clear in the list of examples that they're meant to show the various teaching methods
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:52, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Release
 * Does the AFA need to be abbreviated if it's a single-mention org.?
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 22:38, 10 January 2022 (UTC)


 * B. J. Bullert's line seems a little pedestrian—clarify how it relates to scheduling and release?
 * Done. I removed it. SL93 (talk) 22:51, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Reception
 * Should probably be "Reception and impact"
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 22:38, 10 January 2022 (UTC)


 * According to this source, the film won "Best documentary" at four film festivals (the article mentions two) as well as many, many other awards—this may take a dedicated paragraph?
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:41, 11 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "that are out of context and makes it seem that children are being 'taught to be homosexual in the classroom'": "makes" should probably be "make", and "being taught to be" is a little redundant—"children are "taught to be" works fine
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 22:59, 10 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "A 1999 journal article from the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom states, 'With inspiring footage shot in schools across the country, the film takes viewers inside first through eighth grade classrooms to find out what young students have to say about a topic that often leaves adults tongue-tied'" — While the beginning is editorial ("inspiring"), and the end is as well ("adults tongue-tied"), i think the middle is just kind of summarizing synopsis. Is there a way to slim this down?
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 11 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "The AFA's film has comments from It's Elementary: Talking About Gay Issues in School"—It's Elementary is probably sufficient here
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 22:50, 10 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "Philanthropist James Hormel contributed $12,000 to the funding of the film."—Possibly use Currency, and clarify which film Hormel donated to?
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 22:56, 10 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "ambassadorship to be blocked by the senate"—senate should be U.S. Senate
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 22:45, 10 January 2022 (UTC)


 * As much as I love the word "skewers", I'm not convinced it's formal enough for an encyclopedic article
 * Done. A lot of that section was added by someone else. SL93 (talk) 22:45, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Legacy
 * "said that the flm [sic]"—i'm assuming "flm" is a typo
 * Done. fixed it before I got to it. SL93 (talk) 22:39, 10 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "being able to be included"—should probably just be "being included"
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 22:41, 10 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "just like the first two films" should probably be "Similar to the first two films"
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 22:41, 10 January 2022 (UTC)


 * I'd recommend that the second-to-last sentence use the word "follow-up", since it's an easy keyword for people to remember.
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 22:49, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

That's about all I've got—fantastic work so far, SL93! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 08:06, 10 January 2022 (UTC)


 * I've finished adding responses to your responses :) and I added one more thing in the source review section (sorry i didn't see it beforehand) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 00:31, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

I just fixed a harv error, but looking through the citations there are a bunch of sources using First Last instead of Last, First. Last, First is standard for CS2 templates -- Guerillero Parlez Moi 10:10, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I took care of it, but I'm not sure it was "a bunch of sources". SL93 (talk) 00:38, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Part I
As promised, I am here to help! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 13:04, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Perhaps, a link to gay and lesbian would be helpful in the lead.
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "It received positive reception, but it also received backlash from conservatives" — "backlash from conservatives" sounds a bit too POV. How about "criticism from few conservatives"?
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "It's Elementary: Talking About Gay Issues in School was released" — why is the name repeated How about "The film was released"?
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "The film did not receive much support from PBS" — a casual reader might ask: why is receiving support from PBS important?
 * Done. I added that its the film's first television broadcast. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "from the American Family Association (AFA)." — AFA is not used in the lead again. Do we need to define the abbreviation?
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "  "calls, letters and e-mails urging them not to broadcast It's Elementary"   " — although the lead section usually does not has citations, direct quotations need to be cited anywhere/everywhere. Also, the text doesn't make clear who said/wrote this quotation
 * Done. I reworded it without a direct quotation. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "at the San Francisco International Lesbian and Gay Film Festival and the Chicago International Gay and Lesbian Film Festival" — our articles calls it "Frameline Film Festival" and "Reeling: The Chicago LGBTQ+ International Film Festival". Why are the names changed?
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "among others, the CINE Golden Eagle for Teacher Education and Best Educational Film at the Northern Lights International Film Festival, and other awards." — "among others" and "and other awards" is repetitive
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "The film had the two sequels That's A Family!" — would a colon mark after "sequels" be helpful?
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "Chasnoff wanted to" — we were never introduced to who "Chasnoff" is. First instance in the prose (separate from lead) warrants a full name.
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "involving people who are gay" — 'gay' here is used as gay men or the broader term for homosexuals?
 * Done. SL93 (talk)


 * "Chasnoff and producer Cohen" — first instance of "Cohen" warrants a full name
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "It was hard for them to gain entry into the schools and multiple staff and parents did not want to be recorded" — either replace "schools and multiple" with "schools as multiple", or add a semi colon in place of "and"
 * Done SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "The schools are in San Francisco and New York City, as well as Madison, Wisconsin and Cambridge, Massachusetts" — Missing MOS:GEOCOMMA, and why is SF and NYC separately mentioned?
 * I took the exact suggestion from . I added the GEOCOMMA.SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * okay. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 09:56, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "It was directed by Debra Chasnoff and Helen Cohen" — perhaps, the full names should be moved to previous instance and last names (without links) should be used here
 * I linked it in both places. Is that fine? It seems to me that the director should be linked in the lead. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The issue is that "Debra Chasnoff" is linked twice in the prose (without considering the lead link). Also, on her second instance in the lead, she should be mentioned just as "Chasnoff" – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 09:56, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 17:02, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "  "encourages her students to brainstorm on the words 'gay' and 'lesbian', and to talk about the roots of their associations, assumptions, and attitudes"   " — citation needed immediately after the quotation
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "named Love Makes a Family" — suggesting "named "Love Makes a Family"  "
 * Done. SL93 (talk)


 * "educator resources and special features" — oxford comma after 'resources'
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "on at least 60 PBS stations" — PBS should be linked
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "In 1999, PBS refused to" — PBS should be de-linked
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "due to backlash from the American Family Association" — add '(AFA)', as this abbreviation is later used in the prose.
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "  "Schools cannot be neutral when we're dealing with issues of human dignity and human rights".    " — shouldn't the full stop be inside the quotes?
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "set up billboards that opposed the film" — suggesting "set up billboards opposing the film"
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "The AFA's film has comments from It's Elementary that are out of context and make it seem that children are "taught to be homosexual in the classroom"" — opinion presented as a fact. We'll need attribution for the quote.
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "contributed US$12,000" — unlink "US$", and do we need to specify that it is US dollar. Seems obvious in this context.
 * I only added it because it was suggested by to use the currency template. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * But linking US$ is MOS:OL. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 09:56, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The currency template that suggested automatically linked it. I removed the currency template. SL93 (talk) 17:02, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "the U.S. Senate" — suggesting to spell U.S., as we have used that format in this article
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "Frameline Film Festival" v. "San Francisco International Lesbian and Gay Film Festival" — consistency needed
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "LQBTQ issues" — did you mean "LGBTQ issues"
 * Done. SL93 (talk)


 * "  "divorced, adoptive, guardian, parents with drugs, multi-racial, multi-religious, or disabled"   " — citation needed immediately after the quote.
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

That is it for now. Nice article! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 14:58, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I found few additional sources (book and film reviews). Will they help?
 * I would rather not add information from new sources for an article review if I don't have to. SL93 (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm less experienced in this area than Kavyansh.Singh is, but my reading of the comprehensiveness requirement would say that if there's a major and verifiable fact in the sources that's not in the article, it would need to be included to pass that requirement. I've already indicated my support, and this is Kavyansh's section, of course, so I'll defer to them on this. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 02:31, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * My issue would then be that the fact or facts need to be pointed out to me first. SL93 (talk) 02:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I also don't have access to those sources. SL93 (talk) 02:36, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Never mind. I have access through the Wikipedia Library. It doesn't seem that Kavyansh was asking for me to add major facts though - I also wouldn't know what is major to the reviewer. I will wait for a response from them. SL93 (talk) 02:43, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * @SL93: I did not directly asked you to include that source. As a reviewer, I tried to find additional sources that may help the article. I have not checked all the sources used in the article, and I do not know if the information available in the works I suggest is unique or already available elsewhere. As nominator and a major contributor to the article, I'd expect that you can better judge whether the sources I suggest are useful or not, if they include a "major fact" or not. As to @Theleekycauldron's question, I am not very experienced either, and take my word with a grain of salt, but here is my 2-cent: For FAs, it is expected that if a source is WP:HQRS and it has a unique perspective to add to the topic, it should be cited. Wider topics like Harry S. Truman 1948 presidential campaign (one of my FA), which usually have many sources and citations (it has an entire 200 page book written on it), comprehensiveness is usually not a issue. However, for relatively short articles like this one, "Daisy", or your FAC, we really need to find sources. There is no clear-cut definition for what a comprehensive article is. We have also have a FA less than 4,000 characters long, but that is as comprehensive as it can be. For this particular case, I trust SL93's judgement whether the two sources are important/reliable enough to be added, but I'll expect a better rationale for not using them. Will take another look soon. Thanks! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 13:28, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * My issue for the first reference is that it is an article for a non-notable teacher's lesson plan that also involves two other things and not just the film. For the second reference, it is about the sequel and this article is not about the sequel. I'm not so sure about adding more information for something that isn't the topic of the article. I don't even have the title of the sequel redirecting to this article just in case it can have its own article. SL93 (talk) 17:02, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. Rest, I did not find ant other major source for the article. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 18:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * My issue for the first reference is that it is an article for a non-notable teacher's lesson plan that also involves two other things and not just the film. For the second reference, it is about the sequel and this article is not about the sequel. I'm not so sure about adding more information for something that isn't the topic of the article. I don't even have the title of the sequel redirecting to this article just in case it can have its own article. SL93 (talk) 17:02, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. Rest, I did not find ant other major source for the article. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 18:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Part II
Looking much better, just a few more optional suggestions:
 * " who did want PBS program directors to broadcast It's Elementary". " (both in the lead and prose) — erroneous quote mark
 * Done. SL93 (talk)


 * "It was directed by Chasnoff and Helen Cohen" — just the last name of Cohen would be sufficient. Full name has already been used once.
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 19:28, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "and special features. The special features are deleted scenes," — suggesting "and special features like deleted scenes,"
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 19:28, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "at Ohio State University" — "at the Ohio State University"?
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 19:28, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "by the Director of the Franklin County Education Council Brad Mitchell" — my reading of MOS:JOBTITLE suggests that 'Director' should be lowercased
 * Done. SL93 (talk) 19:28, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * The template at the end of the article writes "1997" in parenthesis after the title of the film. Is that wrong?
 * It's correct. The year is just the year when the film won the award. I will go ahead and add that year to the text. SL93 (talk) 19:28, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * What is your approach to citing sources as short-footnotes (Sfn)? I see that a book which is used twice has been Sfn-ed. But multiple sources which are used more than once are not.
 * I only cited that one book per a suggestion by theleekycauldron. I don't know how to cite sfn with sources that are not books and the information page about it makes my head hurt. I will see if I'm able to figure it out. SL93 (talk) 19:28, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I used sfn for those sources except for New Day Films due to a year being required for the template. SL93 (talk) 20:05, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

– Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 18:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Is this a support? Thanks for the great review. SL93 (talk) 14:33, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I support this nomination for its promotion as a featured article. Sorry for the delay, was bit busy ... And I don't feel there was anything great with my review. Its a pleasure reading, reviewing, and gaining knowledge, all at the same time! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 04:48, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Support from Tim riley
As regards the nominator's worry about the length of the article, my view is that the only measure is that an article should be as long as it needs to be, and no longer. This one seems to me to meet that criterion. A few minor points, none of which affect my support, but may, I hope, be helpful:
 * Lead
 * "The film was the first to provide educators with information on how to prevent discrimination against people who are gay" – the first in America or the first in the world? The former, I imagine, but it would be as well to clarify this.
 * "It received positive reception, but it also received backlash …The film did not receive much support" – wouldn't hurt to trim the repetitions of "received" – along the lines of, e.g., "was generally well received, although there was some backlash from conservatives" or some such.


 * Synopsis
 * There seems to be some inconsistency in the use of present -v- past tenses: "An eighth-grade teacher dismantled stereotypes … A principal of an elementary school held a photography event … A girl with lesbian parents read a Mother's Day essay … A fifth-grade teacher notices that her students have no issues … A Puerto Rican teacher states that her heritage was part of her not being open to LGBTQ matters".


 * Reception and impact
 * Senator Bob Smith of New Hampshire thought that the film discredits a speech that Smith gave in the Senate – I'd be cautious about "thought", here. He may have said so, but it is speculative to say what he thought.

That's all from me. Happy to support the promotion of the article to FA. –  Tim riley  talk   14:59, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the support. I fixed the issues. As for being the first, there was an editor who was wondering if it really was the first such film even though the reliable source said it was "the first of its kind". I changed the sentences in the lead and body to say that the book mentioned it as "the first of its kind". Do you think that is a fair compromise? SL93 (talk) 19:08, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * A shrewd move, I'd say.  Tim riley  talk   19:38, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

(t &#183; c)  buidhe  04:34, 28 January 2022 (UTC)