Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sesame Street/June 2006

Sesame Street

 * FAC: September 2004, October 2004, August 2005
 * PR: July 2005, September 2005, June 2006

Everything asked for in all of the PRs were done, as well as most suggestions from FAC. I haven't gotten much feedback this round on PR, so I'm listing it here, hoping it becomes featured. It is already a GA, and will be included on that 0.5 CD that's going to be released. Fire away. -- Zanimum 15:22, 19 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Object; I have concerns about the prose and citations:
 * "Over 200 different individuals or groups have made appearances, not including repeat appearances." Last phrase is totally useless.
 * It's gone now, but it was to distinguish between number of segments with celebrities, versus number of celebrities. Number of segments with celebrities is essentially double that number. --  Zanimum 14:52, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
 * "The series took over from Captain Kangaroo in 1999". Huh?
 * Reworded. --  z
 * "The music from the series has been popular by most accounts". Wasting the reader's time. Try something like "The series's music has appeared on music charts around the world, including..."
 * Agreed, done. The paragraph was a last minute addition, as there was little discussion of music until recently. --  z
 * "Major funding for Sesame Street is provided by The Corporation for Public Broadcasting and by contributions to local PBS stations from "Viewers Like You."" Is this a direct quote from the broadcast?
 * Yes, it is a direct quote, as evidenced by the article Viewers Like You, which is linked to from the article. --  z
 * You mean the whole thing is a quote, or just "Viewers Like You"? I knew that Viewers Like You was a quote, but wasn't sure if the whole thing was (it sounds rather familiar to me...) --Spangineer[es]  (háblame)  20:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm 99% sure that that whole sentence is a quote, however I've used the quotation marks to denote the fact that VLY doesn't mean the reader of the article, or necessarily all viewers of the program, simply the group of donators PBS refers to by that term. Essentially, just as scientist and lawyers have their own terms, usually printed in italics, this is a term used by public broadcasters, part of their vocabulary. How would you suggest I rephrase the sentence? --  Zanimum 16:15, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
 * "The program fairs better" -- you mean fares.
 * Thx. --  Zanimum 14:55, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
 * "The show lost test viewers' attention during the Street Scenes, meaning Muppets needed to be added, like sugar into medicine." Does this belong in an encyclopedia? And if we're making a claim like that, there better be a citation.
 * Fixed. --  z
 * The term "puppet" is probably preferable to "muppet" when referring to all of the fabric covered characters on the show, since the muppets were a separate group. Not sure though if Big Bird can be considered a "puppet".
 * Puppets are a diverse group, not just things stuck on hands. Big Bird is a puppet. Even Jabba the Hutt is a puppet, despite requiring a crew of seven to work him. The puppets on Sesame Street are Muppets, as book covers featured the byline "Featuring Jim Henson's Muppets". Only recently did that disappear, as Sesame Workshop finally bought the copyright to the characters from the Jim Henson Company. The new characters are commissioned by Sesame Workshop from the Jim Henson Company, and thus they too should be considered Muppets. --  z
 * Interesting. Well, as a long term Sesame Street watcher (albeit a decade ago), I definitely think of Kermit, Gonzo and Miss Piggy when I think of muppets and Ernie, Big Bird and Oscar when I think of Sesame Street.  So I guess more discussion of this would be helpful, to make that distinction.  And if "muppets" is the proper term, then the Overview section shouldn't start by saying "Sesame Street uses a combination of puppets..." without explaining what is meant. The word puppet appears elsewhere as well. --Spangineer[es]  (háblame)  20:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Just further clarification, the byline actually does call them "Jim Henson's Sesame Street Muppets". Anyway to answer your question, does this sentence at the topic of the article not define the fact that they are one and the same: "Sesame Street is well known for the inclusion of the Muppet characters created by the puppeteer Jim Henson." To rephrase any of the sentences, say, call them "Muppet puppets" would be awkward. --  Zanimum 16:11, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment The Muppets informs that while not all puppet characters on Sesame Street are Muppets, many of the older, more established puppets are.
 * * http://muppet.wikia.com/wiki/Muppet is a much more accurate and stable definition than our own. --  Zanimum 13:34, 23 June 2006 (UTC)


 * "In the 36 years the show has run, it is estimated 75 million Americans watched the series as a child, millions more as a parent." Citation please.
 * Done. --  z
 * No citations in the first part of the "Characters" section, where there's important discussion of the multiculturalism of the show. Furthermore, the history section has no citations, except for the inaugaration factoid.
 * The "Overview" section should not exist--that's the point of a lead. Move other information to other sections.
 * Hope this helps. --Spangineer[es] (háblame)  19:46, 19 June 2006 (UTC)


 * supportRichardkselby 00:53, 20 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Object
 * First the good stuff:
 * Sesame Street has a lot of good information in it.
 * The article has many reliable and cited sources.
 * The not so good:
 * The entire article is peppered with what I would politely call "flowery" language, but I could accurately call unsourced POV language. From the lead only (italics are mine):
 * "legendary puppeteer Jim Henson"
 * "long and illustrious history"
 * "has captured the allegiance, esteem, and affections of millions of viewers worldwide"
 * Similar language appears through the remainder of the article, but its highest density seems to be in the lead.
 * (subjective) Overall, the article does not seem to view the big picture of itself. There are stray facts (That Elmo was at President Clinton's inauguration. And? No context is included.), and the article feels like it jumps from section to section, with no idea how we're leading the reader from the beginning to the end of the article. &mdash;D-Rock 02:40, 20 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Fixed the language example you mentioned, willing to hear more. I'd like to hear more on how you think this article could be changed, to show the big picture, without POV slipping it. Tried to fix the Elmo fact, a leftover of the trivia section, tell me if it works. --  Zanimum 15:44, 20 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Object: In a previous nomination (August 2005), I objected because I thought 15 fair use images were too many.  Now it has 16 fair use images, and I still think it's too many.  The image description pages do not have fair use rationales (another editor's objection from the same previous nomination, that has not been addressed).  One of the fair use images is in the footnotes section.  What could it be illustrating there?   Please read the tag on the postage stamp image - it says, in part "to illustrate the stamp in question (as opposed to things appearing in the stamp's design".   The image was important enough to use as the lead image, and yet the fact that a postage stamp was issued is not mentioned anywhere in the article.  So is the image description a way of trying to create a possible fair use case?  It doesn't work in any event - the article is not about the stamp and the image has to go.  If these issues are dealt with, I will read the article. Rossrs 12:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Done, I believe. Please note that two of the images are not fair use, they are free. --  Zanimum 19:30, 30 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Object: a few thoughts:
 * Opening: the wording needs tidying up: "In its history, Sesame Street has received more Emmy Awards than any other program, and has been watched by an estimated 75 million Americans watched the series as a child; millions more have watched around the world, or as parents. millions of viewers worldwide."
 * Tidyed. --  z
 * Overview: "In 1999, the series became the longest running children's program, taking the title from Captain Kangaroo." This sentence needs to state that the series is the longest running children's television program in the US. Without specifying the US, it reads as though it is the longest running children's program in the world, which is incorrect. Blue Peter in the UK, for example, has run from 1958 to the present day.
 * Corrected, and then some. Good spot, finding that. --  z
 * Overview: "The series's music has appeared on music charts around the world, including Ernie's "Rubber Duckie" song, which made #16 on the Billboard Hot 100 chart in 1970, and higher positions in Germany." The wording is awkward in this sentence. Did the Rubber Duckie song attain a higher chart position in Germany, or did other songs attain higher chart positions in Germany?
 * Changed, sadly I don't know exactly what position it achieved. --  Zanimum 16:37, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Regional variations of the show: "Some countries have actually created..." The sentence would read better without 'actually'.
 * Done plus a bit. --  z
 * Regional variations of the show: "Other countries include Bulgaria, Greece (on ERT, later on a private network), Poland and Mexico." What does this sentence refer to? If it refers to the locally produced adaptations, Poland and Mexico are already featured in the preceding list.
 * Done. --  z
 * Research: "Truglio states that the level of interaction between E&R, Content, and Production is "[i]ntimately·hand-in-hand. They are not creating anything without our knowledge, our guidance and our review. We are involved in content development across all media platforms."" A reference is needed for this quotation.
 * Done. --  z
 * Healthy Habits for Life: "According to people from Sesame Workshop, "Health has always been a part of our Sesame Street curriculum..." A reference is needed for this quotation.
 * Done. --  z
 * Merchandising and endorsement: "Tickle Me Elmo was the fastest selling toy of the 1996 season." In the US or worldwide? What does the '1996 season' refer to? The spring of 1996? The winter of 1996? The 1996 Christmas period? The 1996 season of Sesame Street? Is there a citation to support the statement?
 * I can't find any sources right now, surprisingly, so I've listed it as "one of the best selling". --  Zanimum 15:39, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Merchandising and endorsement: "Today there is a live touring show, Sesame Street Live, which has toured since 1980." It may be worth mentioning the scale of the live tour - for example, the Sesame Street Live website shows that in 2005/6 the tour will visit over 150 cities in North America and have international tours in the Netherlands, Mexico and the Carribean.
 * Good point, I guess this is important enough to mention in the main article. --  z
 * Good luck with the article Jazriel 10:45, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose for the badly done rumors section.   --Rob 06:19, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Care to expand on this comment? I do value the extra input. --  Z15:32, 28 June 2006 (UTC)~
 * First, one should be very cautious about mentioning rumors at all. Do it right, or don't do it.  If a rumor is known to be false, it should only be mentioned if its proven to be very famous (e.g. post-death Elvis sightings).  The article mentions the "gay" rumor, then has the inherently non-reliable "snopes" as a source to debunk it.  Best not to mention it, unless major (cited) notable sources have written about it and its impact/meaning.  Also with the American HIV muppet thing, there is weasel words "Many conservatives and religious groups...".  The article should say exactly who said exactly what, and there should be reliable sources cited to prove it.  --Rob 18:21, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * The gay roommates and HIV+ Muppet rumors are biggies, each over 200,000 Google hits for "ernie bert gay" and "AIDS muppet -"south africa"", which gets rid of legitimate results talking about Kami from the search. I've revised the gay rumor, to include more detail. Is this too long now?  --  Zanimum 19:00, 30 June 2006 (UTC)