Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Lord Voldemort/archive1

Lord Voldemort
I nominated this article particularly because i have seen a few other featured articles, and they seem similar, if not lesser than this one. It's looking good now, and with the surge of Harry Potter in the "mainstream", seems pretty poignant :-) James 10:37, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. Comprehensive and well-researched article. Perhaps inline citations would be useful as well. Brisvegas 11:24, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose.
 * The reference to the 7th book seems redundant (you don't use any material from the 7th book for the research, do you?)
 * The text should make better distinction between the fictional and the real world. E.g.: Most people refer to him as "You-Know-Who" or "He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named" rather than say his name out loud. Also, the use of the present tense in this way throughout the text is unencyclopaedic to my taste.
 * You seem to assume that your average reader has read most of the books in question. More references to the material, if possible, more specific than just book numbers (i.e., at least to the chapter granularity) would be welcome, especially for the lead.
 * A lot of very short paragraphs (sometimes a single sentence).
 * I see you are using various categories to place L.V. into various groups along with other (non-HP as well) fictional characters. This is pretty neat, but it also calls (IMHO) for at least one section talking about L.V. in the context of other arch-villains (or other mages... or other fictional immortality seekers...) in other fictional works. This is a slippery topic as it would be very easy to descend into original research here. This is the place where the references are of utmost importance.
 * (comment only) The fair use template on the images you are using asks to please add a detailed fair use rationale for each use. While it is pretty obvious case of fair use for me in this case, maybe you should go ahead and add the rationale anyway.
 * (comment again) Do a thorough copyedit wrt the prose brilliance once you're done with the above.
 * --BACbKA 15:34, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I agree with most of these points, except for the bit about present tense. When describing events which happen within stories, one traditionally uses the "fictional present tense".  Anville 09:52, 27 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Oppose - This article reads more like an entry would read for Voldemort in the fictional world's wikipedia, rather than an entry in our own. Needs less description of the plot of the Harry Potter books, and more discussion on how the character is notable in our world.  As above, "at least one section talking about L.V. in the context of other arch-villains (or other mages... or other fictional immortality seekers...) in other fictional works" would be nice. You might want to compare this article to other fictional characters that have achived F.A. status, such as Felix the Cat,  Batman, and Captain Marvel (DC Comics). Each of these articles have a substantial portion dedicated to cultural depictions, themes, and other details of the character as a fictional character, not just as a character. Fieari 16:46, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose - A comprehensive article -- if the reader has read all the books, that is! A non-fan would have no idea what this is talking about!  It needs to contain information that a casual person would understand. Dee man45 15:17, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose, mainly based on references:
 * "He is widely considered one of the most forceful, powerful, and evil villain figures in modern children's literature." - needs a refernce.
 * Again, the Book 7 reference is unnecessary.
 * Voldemort must have been mentioned in the news, find some citations and reference them - currently, it doesn't establish it's notability outside of the Harry Potter universe. --Cel es tianpower háblame 20:53, 23 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Oppose- Articles about fictional characters in my opinion shouldn't become featured articles —Preceding unsigned comment added by Newwiki (talk • contribs)
 * This isn't an actionable objection. Any Wikipedia article may become a featured article if it fulfills the requirements for comprehensiveness, proper references, appropriate length and use of images, etc. NatusRoma 01:00, 27 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Neutral - the article is comprehensive and a good read - but a none-Harry Potter reader wouldn't understand it very well. Compu  terjoe  09:36, 27 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Oppose I second NatusRoma's comment above. This would be a perfectly valid FA if it established You-Know-Who's notoriety outside the Harry Potter universe, and if steps were taken to keep it comprehensible to the non-compulsive-fans of the world.  (Like me: I saw the newest movie and am waiting until I have the free time to read the first book in Latin before starting on the novels.)  Surely, someone must have called a politician "the Voldemort of Washington," or something like that.  The article could also be shortened by removing redundant information:  the name anagram is explained three times when one would do.  Anville 09:40, 27 February 2006 (UTC)