Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/John Wick (film)/archive2

John Wick (film)

 * Nominator(s): Darkwarriorblake (talk) 12:00, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

This article is about John Wick. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 12:00, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
 * A previous image review was completed by
 * A previous source review was completed by Darkwarriorblake (talk) 12:02, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Airship's flyby
Can you give examples of how you have addressed the issues raised by during the last candidacy? AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:39, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Wick_%28film%29&diff=1188115915&oldid=1184145703 Darkwarriorblake (talk) 17:54, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Can you give specific examples of how you have addressed TompaDompa's concerns, not just a diff showing the changes between the close of the last FAC and now? AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:40, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Not really. Every single one of TompaDompa's issues was addressed before the last nomination closed so there is nothing to show from the last nomination apart from copyediting, which is the link above and of which there were no specific examples to change, just a statement it needed copyediting, and neutrality regarding it being considered a great action film. The latter I tried to address with Tompa at the time but their opinion remained unchanged, and ultimately on that one issue they were being unreasonable as it was thoroughly sourced by reliable sources and so it was one point that no matter what I changed we could never agree because the only way to meet Tompa's request was to remove the content entirely, bearing in mind, again, it was extensively sourced by reliable sources and was not a controversial statement given that it is a sentiment conveyed by the publications in the sources. You can also refer to the comments by in the last article that offer a similar sentiment re: the statement being thoroughly sourced. Oh and I removed the context section. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 20:49, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Darkwarriorblake (talk) 09:07, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your response. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:26, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Pinging previous responders
Pinging, , , , , to see if they are happy to reiterate their support/weak support/oppose responses from the previous nomination just to get this moving. Tompa as the main opposition in the last review, if you are happy to look at it, this link shows copyedits made to the article as requested and the removal of the context section (I can't remember if you asked for that or someone else), and regarding the neutrality I'd ask that you potentially consider FrB.TG's comments here as well as my own respones last time. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 12:17, 9 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the late reply DWB, can you catch me up on what has happened? The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1(The Garage) 17:54, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
 * No problem it's not late, the previous nomination was deemed to have insufficient support so this is a new nomination. The neutral pings above are to everyone who voted on the last nomination to see if they are still happy to give their support or oppose to this nomination since they've already reviewed it and it seems a waste to get a whole bunch of new separate people to re-review it. It won't need as many new reviews in that case and we can avoid the nomination failing either through lack of activity or longevity. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 17:58, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the info. I'll look through the article. The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1(The Garage) 18:04, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
 * This has gotten no activity since the 10th, so I'm pinging back everyone to cast their opinion. The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1(The Garage) 19:16, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I will just stand by my view from last time. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 04:38, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll try and take another look sometime within the coming week. JOE BRO 64  15:50, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Coordinator note
At five weeks in with no supports, this is liable to be archived unless there's significant progress towards a consensus in the next few days. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 23:27, 7 January 2024 (UTC)


 * This doesn't seem to be progressing, so I am regretfully going to archive it. Such is the lack of response that the usual two-week hiatus will not apply. However, I would suggest that immediately re-nominating the same article is probably not the way to go. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:57, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Gog the Mild (talk) 17:57, 10 January 2024 (UTC)