Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Chase (U.S. game show)/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 promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 10:28, 13 April 2017.

The Chase (U.S. game show)

 * Nominator(s): Bcschneider53 (talk) 16:56, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

This article is about the American version of The Chase, a primetime game show on Game Show Network (GSN) from 2013–15. The series is arguably one of GSN's most successful shows of all time and is an adaption of the popular British version of the show. I have tried to model this article after that of another GSN game show, The American Bible Challenge, which recently passed FAC itself. All feedback is welcome and appreciated. Bcschneider53 (talk) 16:56, 14 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Comments from Aoba47
 * The official website link in the “External links” section is dead and needs to found through a website archive. Same goes for the link in the infobox.
 * Done by another user.
 * Makes sense, as it was probably added when the website was still active. This should be an easy fix as I would imagine you can find an archived url of this. Aoba47 (talk) 14:45, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * My mistake; I meant the fixing of the link was done by another user here. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 05:17, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
 * You use the transition: “For each question answered…” twice in close proximity and I would suggest changing one for variety.
 * Done.
 * Thank you. Aoba47 (talk) 14:45, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * The phrase “fell through” in the “Production” section is rather informal and I would recommend using a stronger word choice.
 * Done.
 * Thank you. Aoba47 (talk) 14:45, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * The “Production” section seems rather short. Is there any more information about the production of this show? This may not be possible, but I just want to double-check.
 * I will check again. Bible Challenge had an actual book published with behind-the-scenes information; The Chase did not, which is perhaps why there is not much info beyond renewal and premiere dates.
 * That makes sense. If you cannot find any more information, then it is fine as it currently stands. Aoba47 (talk) 14:45, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I would suggest revising the second paragraph of the “Production” section, as it seems to read rather like a list of dates rather than a cohesive narrative. I would work on presenting the information in a more engaging manner if possible.
 * Done? Tried my best, let me know if you think it can be improved, or feel free to do it yourself. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 04:27, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I would combine the two paragraphs of the “Critical reception” subsection as they are both rather short independently.
 * Done
 * Thank you. Aoba47 (talk) 14:45, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Are there any more reviews of the show? I understand if it is not possible to get more information on this, but I just want to double-check.
 * I was a bit surprised by this too...I'll give it one more look but I doubt there are any I haven't come across.
 * That makes sense. If you cannot find any more information, then it is fine as it currently stands. Aoba47 (talk) 14:45, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Please links Game Show Network the first time that you use it in the body of the article. Also, spell out the network the first time you use it in the body of the article and put the acronym in parenthesis next to it so the future use of the acronym makes sense for the reader. Put the acronym in parenthesis in the lead too.
 * Done.
 * Thank you. Aoba47 (talk) 14:45, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Do you really need a separate subsection for accolades as it is only one paragraph? I would combine this under the umbrella of the “Critical reception” subsection.
 * Done.
 * Thank you. Aoba47 (talk) 14:45, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Why is Labbett referred to as “the Beast”? The article does not provide a clear answer for this.
 * Added explanation for the nickname the first time Labbett is mentioned in the article. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 05:17, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I have made some edits to the article here. Feel free to revert them if you do not agree.
 * Looks good to me.
 * Thank you. Just wanted to make sure with you. Aoba47 (talk) 14:45, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * You only reference the rotating panel from other versions of the game show in the lead, but not in the body of the article. Would it be beneficial to include this comparison in the body of the article as well, ideally with a source to prevent accusations of original research? I also approach leads as including only information covered in the body of the article so the omission of this bit of information in the body of the article seems odd to me.
 * Rewrote the lead and removed the OR; feel free to tweak my post-midnight writing if you so desire. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 05:17, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Overall, great work with the article. Good luck with your work on game shows. Once my comments are addressed, I will support this. If possible, could you possible look at my FAC too? Thank you in advance. Aoba47 (talk) 02:13, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for picking this up after Bible Challenge. I'm very busy with schoolwork right now (I was actually working on a research paper for The Tempest when I saw this and have four papers due this week) so I may not be able to get to this immediately. No promises, but if I can find the time, I'll try to take a look at your FAC, or you can let me know if you would like any other help (perhaps a GAN or something?). Cheers, --Bcschneider53 (talk) 02:26, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your message and no worries. Good luck with all of your schoolwork (your research paper on The Tempest sounds interesting). And don't worry about it if you do not have the time. I enjoyed reading through your article and I hope that I could be some help. Cheers! Aoba47 (talk) 02:35, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Took care of some of the simple fixes. Will look into the others later. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 13:47, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I think it may be done? I'm off to get some rest now as it's after midnight here on the eastern US coast. Also, I have an FLC and GAN right now that need attention (not to mention real life work) so I'm afraid I won't have time to review myself in the immediate future. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 05:17, 2 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Support Everything looks good for me; good luck with this nomination! Aoba47 (talk) 14:54, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Comments by Mike Christie

 * I think an explanation of what a "chase" is needs to be earlier. I didn't understand it until the third paragraph of the gameplay section, which is too late.  I'd suggest an early explanatory sentences that says something like 'A key element of the show is a "chase", in which the chaser and the contestant each answer questions, with the contestant starting with a disadvantage, and the chaser attempting to catch up."  This might need to be as early as the second or third sentence to explain the concept before the reader gets too confused.
 * Done. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 03:43, 12 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Can we get a fair use screenshot of the gameboard? That would help explain sentences like "For each question the contestant answers correctly, the prize money earned moves one step closer to the team bank".
 * Added. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 03:43, 12 March 2017 (UTC)


 * How about a brief summary of the UK show -- date it began, popularity, any significant differences from the US show? I don't think you need more than a couple of sentences, but since it was based on the UK show I think a little more information is warranted.
 * Done. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 03:43, 12 March 2017 (UTC)


 * There appears to be a board game based on The Chase, but I'm not sure if it's based on the UK or US version. If it's the US version, I think you should mention it.
 * Yes, the board game was for the UK version (I actually have a copy of it so I can confirm this is the case). --Bcschneider53 (talk) 21:56, 11 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Presumably the app doesn't really have Labbett answering questions; there's some sort of simulation going on, right? I'd suggest rephrasing to clarify that.
 * Done. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 03:43, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

That's it for a first pass. I think the prose needs a bit of work; I'll do a copyedit pass once the above points are taken care of. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:19, 11 March 2017 (UTC)`
 * Thank you . I'm about to step out for the evening. May be back later in the night and I'll take a look at it then. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 21:56, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Done everything here. Thanks again! --Bcschneider53 (talk) 03:43, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Reading through the gameplay I'm not convinced I fully understand. Here's what I think it's saying -- tell me if I have this right.
 * There are four players in a show -- three new contestants (i.e. they weren't on the previous week's show), and the chaser.
 * Correct. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 20:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)


 * The first round has each contestant answering as many questions as they can for one minute. The chaser also does this, so all four players have some amount of money in their bank at the end of the four one-minute rounds.  There's no competition between the players to answer any of these questions; they're all solo.
 * Only the contestant competes in the first round, and is awarded $5,000 for each correct answer in the minute time period. The chaser then gives his two offers, so no, he does not do this. Once the contestant has selected which amount to play for, the chase is played, and the process repeats for all three contestants. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 20:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The article currently says the Cash Builder round adds money to the team's bank, but does the chaser only chase the amount that each contestant won? E.g. If I win $40K, and the chaser doesn't catch me, and you then win $50K in the Cash Builder round, and the chaser catches you, the team bank only loses the $50K you won, right?  So it's not really in the team bank until the chase is over? Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 22:12, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
 * If you win $40K in the Cash Builder, that money gets placed on the gameboard five spaces away from the bank. The chaser then makes a higher and lower offer, say $90K and $20K. The contestant chooses which amount to play for. If he contestant wins the chase, s/he adds that money to the team bank. So yes, in your hypothetical situation, you would move on to the Final Chase, while I would be eliminated. Our team would have $40K in the bank (which was not added to the bank until you won your chase) with our third teammate still left to play. Hope this helps! --Bcschneider53 (talk) 22:41, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Once this first round is over, each contestant participates in a chase. The contestant is given two offers: one to play for more money and start further from the bank; the other to play for less money and start closer to the bank.  If they don't accept either offer they are five spaces away; the offers are for four spaces and less money or six spaces and more money, but the chaser may also choose to make a super offer of seven spaces and even more money.  This choice is at the chaser's discretion; the other two choices are always offered.
 * Correct. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 20:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)


 * The chase then happens, with the displayed gameboard showing $90,000; after the chase starts presumably the other slots go blank. Is the red arrow the chaser?  Does that move down as the chaser answers questions correctly?
 * Correct, the chaser's position is indicated by the red arrow; I'll clarify this. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 20:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)


 * The chaser doesn't have to overtake the contestant; they just need to get to the square the contestant is on, so the contestant presumably goes first. The default (five spaces) means that the chaser has to have three more right answers than the contestant before the contestant gets five right answers.  The super offer would mean that the contestant has no room to manoeuvre -- if they make a single mistake the chaser can catch them.  Is that right?
 * Correct. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 20:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)


 * At the end of the three chases, contestants who were not caught advance to the Final Chase; if all were caught, then the three contestants choose one of themselves to play.
 * Correct. Incredibly rare (only happened in the cited episode), but yes, this is the case. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 20:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)


 * No additional money is added during the Final Chase; the money at stake is the sum of the individual banks of the contestants who made it to the Final Chase. The contestants get a head start of one space per contestant who reached the final round; if none won their chases, do they still get a head start of one space?
 * Correct. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 20:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)


 * What's the choice between A and B? Do the teams know anything about each set of questions -- e.g. that the A questions are all about sports?
 * It's a random set. Nothing is known about it. Neither the chaser nor the contestants know what questions are in each set. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 20:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)


 * What does it mean to "pass a question"?
 * To say "pass" instead of giving an answer. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 20:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)


 * The teams move as far as they can, and then the chaser tries to catch them, except that an error by the chaser allows the team to try to answer that question and move further ahead (or push the chaser back a space).
 * Correct, a correct answer pushes the chaser back, unless the chaser is at zero, in which case the teams total increases by one space. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 20:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)


 * If the chaser catches them the team loses the money and the show is over.
 * Correct. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 20:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Any mistakes? Can you fill in the answers to the questions? Once I understand it a bit better I'll give it a copyedit. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:33, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I think I hit every question. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 20:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

I added one more question above, but I think I know the answer so I've done a rewrite of the first part of the game play section on the article talk page, without putting in the sources. Can you take a look and see what you think? I did it because I found it hard to be sure I understood the gameplay correctly, and once I got the answers and had it clear in my head I thought it might be useful. I think it's easier sometimes for someone who is not familiar with the material to write an description, because they know what's not obvious. I'm not saying you have to use this version, of course, but to me it's clearer than what you have now. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:33, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Heading out to dinner now. I'll take a look in a couple of hours. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 22:42, 13 March 2017 (UTC)


 * We're eighteen months past the last air date mentioned in the article -- did the fourth season finish yet? Is it currently airing?
 * The fourth season finished as of December 2015, which is when the last new episode aired. GSN very rarely makes official cancelation announcements, but the series hasn't been seen in new episodes since that time. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:15, 14 March 2017 (UTC)


 * The "dick-related" line is worth a grin, but that's just the headline; are you sure we need to mention it? Teti's actual comments don't really call it out; the clip gives him an opportunity to crack wise but that's really it.
 * Removed. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:15, 14 March 2017 (UTC)


 * How about trying to add an abbreviated definition of "chase" to the lead? It's a short lead, so it would have to be a very concise definition, but it might be worth trying as otherwise reading the lead really doesn't explain what's going on.
 * Gave it my best shot. Feel free to tweak it as always. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:15, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

I think that's everything I can see on a second pass. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:29, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I think that covers the second pass. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:15, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Support. I tweaked the lead a little. Everything else has been addressed. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 17:43, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Support The article is well-written and appears to be comprehensive. I have made some minor prose adjustments but have not spot checked the sources. The only issue I can see is the sources need to be archived which I recommend to prevent link rot. MWright96 (talk) 17:44, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 22:52, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Support on prose per my standard disclaimer. As always, feel free to revert my copyediting. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 00:59, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Comments: I read this with a view to promoting but ended up doing a little copy-editing, so I'll have to recuse from this. I think we're OK from a prose viewpoint and would have no objections to promotion, but two little points which I think need clearing up; I would probably support after this. Sarastro1 (talk) 10:47, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * In the Gameplay section, we have a few places where we are apparently unreferenced; I think that the information is probably covered by the next cite but it is good practice to always end a paragraph with a reference even if it is covered in the next paragraph.
 * I see the point is covered above, but it is quite a big one; if the show is no longer broadcast, we really need something to say this as it is a gaping hole in an otherwise comprehensive article. I'm sure we can find something. Sarastro1 (talk) 10:47, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Like I said, GSN rarely announces cancelation. The only evidence I can find is that their Facebook page for The Chase makes no mention of any new episodes after December 11, 2015 (and has been relatively dormant since then). I assume their Facebook page is not an acceptable source though. I'm thinking maybe I could say something along the lines of "The series has not aired a new episode since its season four finale, which aired on December 11, 2015" and then cite the applicable episode, but do you have any other suggestions? Another solution may be to note the series' absence from any recent press releases regarding series development, citing said press releases. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 12:18, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I think simply stating that no new episodes have aired since... would work perfectly. Sarastro1 (talk) 12:59, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 13:02, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I made it "As of March 2017", since we want the article to stay accurate even if a subsequent series appears. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:09, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment I personally have no problem with this, but... --Bcschneider53 (talk) 19:24, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, not sure why they reverted. I won't oppose over it, but if you agree it should be re-added please go ahead.  We can discuss on the talk page if it's reverted again. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 20:52, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Ehh, I'm indifferent. Don't worry, if the series ever does come back, you can be sure I'll make a note of it :) --Bcschneider53 (talk) 21:05, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Support: Happy to support this now (obviously recused as coordinator and did a little copy-editing). Sarastro1 (talk) 13:32, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Image review:
 * File:The Chase (U.S. game show) logo.jpg: Non-free license seems correct to me, ditto for using the logo in the infobox to identify the work. Non-free use rationale seems sufficient.
 * File:Chase gameboard.png: Not sure how a screenshot of a work provides "critical commentary". It also isn't a logo. So the non-free use rationale needs some improvement.
 * File:Brooke Burns 2010.jpg: Free image from Flickr. Using it to show the presenter (?) seems OK to me. Not seeing any evidence of copyvio.
 * ALT text may benefit from a slight expansion in image #2. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:27, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I've tweaked the second image's rationale a bit as well as the ALT text. Is this better? --Bcschneider53 (talk) 13:41, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Now it seems fine. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:51, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

To the coordinators: I will be leaving for a 10-day missions trip in Mexico a week from today, and it is unlikely I will be able (let alone wanting) to do any editing during that time. Based on my prior FAC experiences, I believe this is a source review away from promotion, but aside from that, is there anything I need to do to ensure this is closed and (hopefully!) promoted within a week's time? Many thanks again, Sarastro, for your main review a couple of weeks ago. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 18:47, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Reference and source review by Cas Liber

 * References formatted consistently. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:08, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Earwig's too clear Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:17, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * FN9 used once - material faithful to source.
 * FN15 used once - material faithful to source.
 * FN26 used once - material faithful to source.
 * FN31 used once - material faithful to source.

Ok, I am satisfied. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:29, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much! :) --Bcschneider53 (talk) 15:48, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 10:28, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.