Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Space Pilot 3000/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:SandyGeorgia 21:59, 26 July 2008.

Space Pilot 3000

 * Nominator(s): Stardust8212

This article has been a "Good Article" for some months now and I feel the necessary changes have been made to move to the next level. I believe the main issues presented in the most recent peer review have been addressed and I hope that I will be able to address any further issues satisfactorily during this process. Thank you for your time in reviewing this article. Stardust8212 01:05, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  01:41, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comments regarding MoS compliance.
 * In the "Continuity" section, images shouldn't be left-aligned under section headers, although given the small amount of text in the section, I know that might be hard to avoid.
 * In its initial airing the episode had "unprecedented strong numbers" with a Nielsen rating of 11.2/17 in homes and 9.6/23 in adults 18-49. "18-49" should have an en dash instead of a hyphen.
 * The Futurama premiere was watched by more people than either its lead-in show (The Simpsons) or the show following it (The X-Files) and it was the number one show among men aged 18-49 and teenagers for the week. Likewise.
 * I think I've fixed the dashes, I'm terrible with dashes though so it's equally likely that I fouled them up. I tried a couple different layouts for the continuity section to address your concern but they all looked pretty bad, anything that is right aligned pops down below the infobox and moving the images below the first paragraph moves them away from the relevant text and interferes with the section below. The only "good" option I can come up with is to switch the production section with the continuity section, then the images could be right aligned without as much infobox interference but I'm not sure I want to change the article structure to deal with a pretty minor style issue. If you have a better idea I would love to hear it. Thanks for taking the time to comment. Stardust8212 02:48, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Yep, the dashes look better. I also tried a new format for the images, but feel free to revert if you don't like it. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  13:37, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the suggestion but I reverted it, there was the same problem with the images not being next to the text they are discussed in (at 1600x1200 they move all the way down next to the Broadcast and Reception section) and also the label of "Scenes from Space Pilot 3000" isn't technically correct as the second image is from a later episode. Here's an idea, could the images be placed at the bottom of the plot section on the left side so that they still align with the proper text but are not actually under the section header? I'll try that now, I think it's a bit better.Stardust8212 14:47, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

comment I am unconvinced Image:Nibbler-SpacePilot3000.jpg and Image:Fry3.gif are both justified WP:NFCC#3, I think one would suffice Fasach Nua (talk) 07:35, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, I think it does satisfy it, a single image cannot portray that the exact same scene is shown in two different episodes but changed to show a change in continuity. Since the article specifically discusses the change it seems appropriate to show this change. Both images are low resolution so I don't think 3b is an issue either. Stardust8212 14:47, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Indeed! I was looking at the images on an old LCD screen, and they didnt come out too well, you are correct both are needed. Fasach Nua (talk) 15:06, 17 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment - I think "Cultural references" should really come before "Broadcast and reception". Also, (in B&R) New Statesman, Science Fiction Weekly and IGN.com should be in italics. Gran2 11:53, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, all done. Thanks! Stardust8212 13:20, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:35, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Comment&mdash;Seems decent. The lead is a little short, but then so too is the article. I only saw a few issues that I couldn't immediately address: Thanks.&mdash;RJH (talk) 22:48, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * As Futurama is a U.S. production, shouldn't one of the episode titles be "Love's Labors Lost in Space"? Or am I mistaken about the origin?
 * "...time is seen passing outside the window until reaching the year 3000. This is a parody of a similar scene in the film The Time Machine." How is this scene a "parody"?
 * Please clarify why "olde fortran malt liquor" is an inside joke. (per Olde English 800 perhaps?)
 * Thanks for your comments, I will see what I can do to address them. As for the episode title Love's Labours Lost in Space, the title is a reference to Love's Labours Lost so it uses the English spelling, there has been considerable confusion over this as can be seen on that article's talk page archive however the title itself can be confirmed on the DVD. I'll see what I can do about your other points (though it may take me a couple days, visiting family over the weekend). Stardust8212 23:40, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * After verifying with the audio commentary I have changed the wording to say the scene was inspired by The Time Machine rather than parodying it. I have also added some further commentary about Olde Fortran to hopefully clarify this point. Stardust8212 22:29, 24 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Oppose. The prose is really awkward. These are just the first few examples:
 * "It also sets the stage for many of the events to follow in the series, foreshadowing plot points that are not revealed until later in the show’s run." "for many of the events to follow in the series" could be "future events". "Foreshadowing plot points that are not revealed until later in the show's run." - By definition, foreshadowing is something that isn't "revealed" until later.
 * "In general the episode received good reviews; often contrasting it to Groening’s other series, The Simpsons." This is just a weird sentence.
 * "He is defrosted in what is now New New York City one thousand years later, on December 31, 2999" could be "He is defrosted on December 31, 2999, in what is now New New York City."
 * "Refusing to accept this...." "to accept this" is redundant.
 * These types of mistakes appear throughout the article. Also, the images are throwing off the text format in both of my monitor resolutions (1024x768 and 1680x1050). Could they be moved somewhere else?-Wafulz (talk) 19:48, 20 July 2008 (UTC)


 * It looks like someone went through and did a basic copyedit. However, the writing is still really awkward. I think someone uninvolved with the article should have a look.-Wafulz (talk) 15:09, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Apologies for not noting it here, I am trying to work these issues just some real life issues have kept me from having as much time to work on it as I would like, I will try to find a fresh copy editor, it is not something I am very good at myself. Stardust8212 16:44, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I have asked a couple editors who might be interested to copyedit, hopefully this will help bring the article to your standards. As for the images looking awful...I fully agree. I personally liked the original layout but the first comment here informed me that images apparently just aren't done that way (even if it does look better :-P) so this is the best alternative that has come up, I'm open to other suggestions. Stardust8212 22:29, 24 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Oppose — Definitely GA quality, but not up to FA standards. The lead is short, and I don't really like the use of images in the article. Needs a screenshot that appropriately illustrates the story content of the episode. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 02:16, 25 July 2008 (UTC))
 * Do you have a problem with the images that are there or do you just think there needs to be another image? How about something like Image:Futurama - The Future.jpg? I will see what I can do about the lead. Stardust8212 02:25, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Perfect! (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 12:24, 25 July 2008 (UTC))
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.