Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sharon Newman/archive1


 * 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 not promoted by User:GrahamColm 10:01, 4 August 2013 (UTC).

Sharon Newman

 * Nominator: — Ar  re  06:15, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because... I've been working on this article since December 2011. With much work, it finally became a good article in March 2013. of the Guild of Copy Editors thoroughly copy-edited it a month later. After much tweaking and further adjustments I feel that it is worthy of being a FA. If you oppose, please address your issues here so they can be resolved. It's a bit lengthy, but it goes into comprehensive depth regarding the topic and covers everything. Thankyou, Ar  re  06:15, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Delegate note -- This page was only transcluded to WP:FAC today so, although it has garnered some comment through a notice on the Soap Opera project page, it's only as of now that it can be expected to pick up any reviewers trawling the FAC list... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:01, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments from Creativity97

 * I am one-hundred percent for this FA nomination. The article has been worked on immensely in the past few years (mostly by Arre) and it really deserves the recognition of featured article status. It would also be the very first FA for American soap opera articles, which would be a big deal. Regards,  Creativity  97  21:23, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thankyou C97:) Ar  re  04:23, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments from Cassianto
Casting
 * The paragraph should not start with the surname, full name required.
 * Again with Case. This should also include a link.
 * "...who plays Sharon to the present" -- check the prose. This doesn't read at all right.
 * "...was the third actress to have the role in a four-month period." -- Play the role surely?
 * Made adjustments, done. Ar  re  04:23, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Characterization
 * Shero should be in inverts
 * Sorry, I am not familiar with Zap2it and I was forced to use the link to find out. Could you include a brief introduction to it?
 * What do you mean? Introduce it in the prose? Ar  re  04:23, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, for example: "The theatrical newspaper The Stage thought that the performance was..."
 * Done Ar  re  11:10, 1 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Too many quotes leads to bumpy prose and interrupts the natural flow. See WP:QUOTEFARM.  There are far to many quotes within this section IMO.
 * Well, a person who took the article Poppy Meadow to FA status mentioned that quotes are extremely helpful for articles like this. Considering they are actual quotes from people. And they aren't long quotes... But I've slightly fixed that issue. Ar  re  04:23, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Funnily enough I had the Meadow article open which I have used for guidence in my review. This maybe the correct style, but it caused for a very bumpy read. --   Cassianto Talk   09:47, 1 June 2013 (UTC)


 * "However, the actress has expressed displeasure with Sharon's..." -- Why the 's for Sharon?
 * Done, couldn't believe that hadn't been noticed before. Ar  re  04:23, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Nick and Sharon
 * Link to Madison.
 * "In January 2009..." -- Be consistent if you are to use an American comma after a date opener, such as you do everywhere else.
 * I'm certain that formatting it that way would be incorrect, are you sure? Ar  re  04:23, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
 * "In January 2009 Nick and Sharon reunite..." compared to "In May 2005, 14-year-old Cassie..." and "In February 2003, Case temporarily exited the show..." and "In 2012, after Victor disappears..." etc. Having gone through, I note some are given the comma and some aren't.  I don't think there is a correct way, but I would make it consistent if nothing else --   Cassianto Talk   09:47, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Ohh sorry I misread that, I thought you meant write it as "January, 2009". Fixed. Ar  re  11:10, 1 June 2013 (UTC)


 * "Morrow (the actor playing Nick)..." -- I don't feel we need to be reminded of this.
 * "After another one-night stand..." -- Another? Surely one-night stand should then be linked on the first mention?
 * It's not mentioned before, it's just implied. Ar  re  04:23, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, ok. --  Cassianto Talk   09:47, 1 June 2013 (UTC)


 * "After another one-night stand Sharon becomes pregnant,[33] briefly lying that Jack is the baby's father when Summer becomes ill and Phyllis needs Nick.[33] Nick soon finds out, but their daughter Faith is kidnapped at birth by Nick's brother (Adam) and given to Ashley (Jack's sister). Sharon, believing Faith has died, seduces a guilty Adam.[33] " -- Why do we repeat the same reference three times in one paragraph? One is needed at the end, that's all.
 * Done Ar  re  04:23, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Cameron Kirsten ordeal
 * "While away, Sharon becomes suicidally depressed..." -- One or the other I think, suicidal or depressed.
 * "That night she meets (and had an affair with) businessman Cameron Kirsten..." "She meets...had an affair with..." →"She meets and has an affair with..."
 * "When Sharon return to Genoa City, she is horrified when Cameron follows her for "business" with Newman Enterprises." -- Who said "business? Why is it a quote?
 * I've re-worded this. It's like that because the business was fake. The article it was from had quotes too. Ar  re  04:23, 1 June 2013 (UTC)


 * "When she arrives they have a fight in which Sharon throws a bottle at him to keep him from raping her, "killing" him." -- Again here.
 * "Detective Weber (Sherman Augustus) is suspicious of Sharon about Cameron's disappearance." →"Detective Weber (Sherman Augustus) is suspicious of Sharon's involvement in Cameron's disappearance."
 * "When Sharon return to Genoa City, she is horrified when Cameron follows her for "business" with Newman Enterprises.[39] He blackmails her into meeting him at a motel. When she arrives they have a fight in which Sharon throws a bottle at him to keep him from raping her, "killing" him.[39] After driving around with his body in her car trunk for days, she dumps it in an alley.[39] " -- Repeated ref again. This only needs to be given once at the end.
 * "Sharon begins "hallucinating" with visions of Cameron's "ghost" (him, alive)." -- Why the quotes?
 * They are in quotes because they aren't literal events. She wasn't hallucinating and it wasn't his ghost, as in explained in the brackets. I think that should remain. Ar  re  04:23, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The use of quote marks here is confusing. Try reading it without; the sentence still reads the same which proves the inverts are redundent.  Lets see what others think. --   Cassianto Talk   09:47, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

More to come. --  Cassianto Talk   23:26, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "Case noted that Sharon was getting into "deeper" trouble by making mistakes "trying to do the right thing". -- Again here.
 * "Cameron reveals himself while Sharon has lunch with Nikki (Nick's mother). He had murdered Sharon's ex-boyfriend (and Cassie's biological father) Frank Barritt (Phil Dozois), who was visiting town, and hid the body in Sharon's car trunk.[39] Cameron's crimes are revealed; he is jailed, leaving Sharon free to live a normal life.[39]" -- ref repetition.
 * "The actress felt that Sharon was still a romantic lead: 'Your romantic lead shouldn't just be a simple romantic lead...' " -- Too many "Romantic lead"s. Sure the quote can't be helped, butI would swap your one.
 * Done everything else. Thankyou :) Ar  re  04:23, 1 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Cassie's death
 * "A weakened Cassie escapes from the hospital to find Daniel and tell him she was driving; she is returned to the hospital." -- Repetition of hospital. *Suggest* →"Cassie becomes hospitalised and escapes to find Daniel to tell him she was driving, but is soon re-admitted." Also, did she manage to speak with him?
 * Fixed & she sort of did find him but didn't say anything to him. Ar  re  01:58, 2 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Do we need to link drinking and driving? Also, was the foundation solely aimed at teenagers, or drink driving per se?
 * OVERLINK to Zap2it.
 * Fixed overlinks. Ar  re  01:58, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

"According to Case, Sharon loses her 'entire identity' after Nick cheats on her and 'needed a new one' " -- more pointless quotes. Needed a new what? This is a little ambiguous.
 * "In 2005 good-girl Cassie becomes a rebellious teenager; Nick and Sharon have a difficult time dealing with her.[41] Cassie has a crush on bad-boy Daniel Romalotti (Michael Graziadei), who is dating Lily Winters (Christel Khalil). One night, against her parents' wishes she sneaks out to a party. In a ploy to impress a drunken Daniel she attempts to drive him home, despite being underage. The car crashes, leaving them with no memory of the accident. Daniel is thought to have been driving, and is blamed for the accident. A weakened Cassie escapes from the hospital to find Daniel and tell him she was driving; she is returned to the hospital."[41] -- Repeated ref.
 * Other romances
 * Well, needed a new identity. It would be weird/repetitive to say "According to Case, Sharon loses her entire identity after Nick cheats on her and needs a new identity", don't you think? Ar  re  01:58, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I am not asking you to repeat the word. Please think further afield than that. Is there another word for "identity? Is there a different way the phrase could be written so we only use only one identity?  I would also change "cheats" to something a little less tabloidy.   Perhaps "needed a new one" is redundent here? Or even "loses her entire identity".  *Maybe* "According to Case, Sharon needs a new identity after Nick's infidelity." Or "Sharon becomes depressed at Nick's infidelity. Case thinks that Sharon 'needs a new identity.' " or "According to Case, Sharon loses her entire identity after Nick's infidelity and the character needs to reinvent herself". Or "According to Case, Sharon loses her entire identity after Nick's infidelity and needs to adopt a new personality". What about; "According to Case, Sharon loses her 'entire identity' and needs a new one after Nick's infidelity. "  --   Cassianto Talk   04:36, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Changed this. Ar  re  17:01, 20 June 2013 (UTC)


 * "She begins a romance with Jack Abbott (Peter Bergman), Phyllis' ex" *Suggest* "She begins a romance with Phyllis' ex-partner Jack Abbott, played by Peter Bergman." IMO, I would introduce the actors sometimes to help the prose flow as an over reliance on parenthesis can cause messy prose.
 * I've done that, but it sort of upsets the consistency of all actor names in brackets following the character names. Ar  re  01:58, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
 * As a personal rule, I adopt an "anymore than three, give parenthesis" when doing this. Maybe you could do as I suggest if there are singular characters mentioned, but not more than two or three.  Keep them as they are. I just think putting the singular ones in prose form breaks down the monotony and awkwardness of relying on parenthesis. --   Cassianto Talk   04:53, 2 June 2013 (UTC)


 * "She begins a romance with Jack Abbott (Peter Bergman), Phyllis' ex.[45] Bergman called the courtship "only appropriate", explaining: "Wherever Sharon goes, she is embarrassed. Will Phyllis come walking around the corner? But Sharon doesn't have any reason to be embarrassed with Jack".[45] -- Repeated ref.
 * In fact, before I go on can you please check the whole article for consecutively repeated references, choppy, unnecessary quotes, and consistency in American style commas following dates beginners. I am seeing more and more as I continue, and it is slowing down my review as I have to keep listing them. Cheers --   Cassianto Talk   20:38, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Will do. Ar  re  01:58, 2 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Life as a fugitive
 * "In January 2011, Sharon is arrested for the murder of Adam's ex-wife, Skye Newman (Laura Stone). Sharon had previously gone to Hawaii to find Skye, who fell into an active volcano. CBS Soaps In Depth reported that a distraught Sharon might commit suicide." -- Why? Obvious to you I know, but could we explain that she felt depressed or upset prior to this as it looks a bit redundant without it.  Remember, some of us have never seen this series.
 * Fixed. Ar  re  17:01, 20 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Mental health
 * "In 2009, Sharon suffers from kleptomania (an impulse-control disorder), causing her to steal items from people and stores and eventually forcing her to admit herself to a psychiatric hospital while she is pregnant." -- "In 2009, Sharon suffers from kleptomania (an impulse-control disorder), causing her to steal items from people and stores. As a result, she is forced to admit herself into a psychiatric hospital while she is pregnant."
 * "In 2012, after Victor disappears after his wedding to Sharon..." -- repetition of "after". Suggest: "In 2012, Victor disappears after his wedding to Sharon"
 * Fixed Ar  re  11:21, 23 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Storylines
 * "Noah survives, and Grace decides to raise Cassie as her own; however, her plans are foiled when Nick and win custody." -- Check the ending of this sentence.
 * Corrected Ar  re  11:21, 23 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Reception
 * (including Case, Braeden, Morrow and Muhney),[57][18][55][58] -- Ref order
 * Corrected Ar  re  11:21, 23 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Lead section
 * is a fictional character in the American CBS Daytime soap opera The Young and the Restless, portrayed by Sharon Case." -- I don't know if using "on" is American English, but as an Englishman it sounds odd.
 * JMO but "in" sounds odd too. I changed it to "from", is that okay? Ar  re  04:46, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
 * That works too. --  Cassianto Talk   08:58, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * "...character made her debut March 24, 1994." →"...character made her debut on March 24, 1994."
 * "When first introduced, the character was described as a "young girl from the poor side of town". -- By who?
 * It's said by the official website for the soap; it'd be awkward to say "according to the soap's website" in the lead. I altered it to something else; "When first introduced, the character was a young girl from the wrong side of the tracks". Ar  re  04:46, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Not sure about "from the wrong side of the tracks". Out of the two, I preferred the first version.
 * Okay, altered. Ar  re  13:05, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * You call him Nick, but the link refers to him as Nicholas. How was he known in the series? If it was Nick, I would pipe the link to Nick Newman and refer to him as Nick throughout.
 * I've written Nicholas "Nick" Newman; is that okay? Ar  re  04:46, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes. --  Cassianto Talk   08:58, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure you "obtain" custody, you either win it or lose it don't you?
 * Obtain means to acquire something. They acquired custody of the child. Ar  re  04:46, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Obtain is to acquire something yes, but my understanding would be that you obtain something physically. You don't obtain an appeal? You win an appeal as its a battle between two people with one outcome. Similarly, this would work for custody as that too is between two people. --   Cassianto Talk   08:58, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmm true, okay I've changed it to "won". Ar  re  13:05, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * "Despite her marriage to..." best to mention that this was her second marriage.
 * "...which Case called incestuous." -- if she called it incestuous then I would use speech marks here.
 * The once-"beloved" character was now perceived as "crazy", with critics blaming Bell for the character's "royal destruction" "via one ill-conceived storyline and/or romance after another" amid promises to strengthen Sharon's character." -- Why all the speech marks? Say who perceived the character to be all these things and it may look a bit better. IMO, I wouldn't bother and would delete the inverts altogether.
 * Why have you cited the end of paragraph three?
 * "Sharon has been characterized as "kindhearted", "insecure" and "not your typical romantic lead"." Again here, why the inverts? If you want to use them say who said it.
 * Fixed all of these. Ar  re  04:46, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Support per resolved comments. A good article on a character who I knew nothing about prior to this.  Cassianto Talk   05:39, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments from Caringtype1

 * Comments Many of the quotes in the Development section are chopped up and very awkward to read. For example, sentences like this "According to Case, Sharon loses her "entire identity" after Nick cheats on her and "needed a new one"." They are confusing to read. I think either the full quote should be used, or the sentences be reworded. Adding to the confusion, quotation marks are used in sentences like this one, "Sharon begins "hallucinating" with visions of Cameron's "ghost" (him, alive)." This reads very similar to a sentence using an exact quote, which isn't the purpose here. That sentence should be somehow rewritten to read more clearly, like "Sharon begins hallucinating with visions of Cameron's ghost, revealed to be him alive." Or something like that, so it removes the unnecessary quotes and parenthesis. Also are you sure "Cameron Kristen ordeal" is the best heading to use? It's not very descriptive at all. Also, in reply to Creativity97's above comment, the article can't be made a FA just because someone worked very hard on it, and you want it to be the first FA for an American soap. It's definitely a good article, but in its current state, it's jet not ready for FA.Caringtype1 (talk) 19:46, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
 * As per my points above. Thanks for your view Caringtype1.  Arre, I think these will need to be sorted for this to stand a continued chance at FAC.  --   Cassianto Talk   20:16, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry to intrude here, but Caringtype1, all I meant when I said the article had been worked on very hard was that editors should continue to work on it and get it to the next stage, which should be a given when someone says something like that. I didn't mean it in any way that it would just be an accomplishment for WP:SOAPS or anything. Just wanted to clarify. Regards,  Creativity  97  21:13, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh okay, I just wanted to make sure those were observations you were making, not reasons to pass.Caringtype1 (talk) 02:28, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Caringtype1, I think it would be even worse if full quotes were used, then everyone would be saying the article relies too heavily on quotes, which it would. Like I said before the Poppy Meadow article contains plenty of quotes (not to knock on WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS' door), just saying. I didn't know paraphrasing was this difficult for people to read, to be honest. The person who copy-edited this didn't. I've begun fixing it up anyway.Thanks for your comments. Oh and another thing, yes I do feel that "Cameron Kirsten ordeal" is an appropriate title; that storyline consisted of many tumultuous events and to list them all would be too much. But I'd be open to changing it, do you have suggestions, Caringtype1? Ar  re  01:58, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I guess using several lengthy quotes would be worse. But I think less chopped up quotes would really help the flow of the article. Maybe your right about the title "Cameron Kristen ordeal", doing more research about the topic, I see the storyline took many different routes that would be hard to sum up in another heading. Also in that section it says "When Sharon return to Genoa City...", needs an 's' after return. Also the story lines sections frequently mentions "Newman" as a company, whereas elsewhere, it is referred to as "Newman Enterprises". It "Newman" what it's called on the show? If so, the first time it is mentioned should include "...Newman Enterprises, commonly called Newman", or something. That's all the comments I have for right now.Caringtype1 (talk) 02:11, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree with you. --  Cassianto Talk   04:58, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

It's been a while. I would just like to say, I've been trying to see if I could remove some of the quotes. But it's extremely hard, considering without quotations these words seem odd and awkward. I've fixed other issues too. But, I haven't done anything to the quotes in "Reception" because there has to be a lot of quotes in that section. Ar re  11:45, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * It is usual to have a lot of quotes in a "Reception" section. As long as the amount of critical comments are equal in terms of positive and negative, I don't foresee too much of a problem here.  My concerns were over pointless quotes from the other sections; as a rule of thumb, a quote should only occur if it adds something of value to that particular sentence.  If it doesn't, then I would avoid. --   Cassianto Talk   16:23, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

I've fixed up all issues such as unnecessary quotes, consistency in American style commas following date beginners and also references which have been repeated. Ar re  01:35, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments from Laser brain
Oppose due to sourcing and plagiarism issues. I do not think the plagiarism is intentional—it looks like a case of the editors not understanding how to properly quote, paraphrase, and summarize sources. Quotations have been used improperly, and I found instances of close paraphrasing or outright copying of text outside of quotations. Of the first four refs I checked, each has issues. This sample indicates that the whole article needs to be audited for plagiarism.
 * "Despite her crimes and faults, Global Regina describes Sharon as a central heroine who has endured many challenges to get to where she is." This is the first sentence I read at random and it suffers from problems:
 * The opening modifying phrase is misplaced. It's currently modifying "Global Regina", which I'm assuming isn't the thing that has crimes and faults.
 * Global Regina redirects to a TV channel article.. what is it really?
 * The sentence itself is too closely paraphrased to the source text.

It looks like the entire approach to sourcing and quoting needs examination. -- Laser brain  (talk)  13:41, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Ref 101: You selectively quoted phrases from the source, but simply changing "masks" to "might mask" in your own writing does not sufficiently paraphrase. You are thus plagiarizing.
 * Ref 102: I don't understand why you have quoted "seem to think". Are you quoting the source text to avoid having to paraphrase? Quotations should be used only when the source text is profoundly written or when you wish include a quotation by an authority rather than paraphrasing or summarizing.
 * Ref 74b: Same problem as ref 101. You've selectively quoted the source, but included source text elsewhere in the sentence without quotation. That's plagiarism.

Graham Colm (talk) 21:38, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.