Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Shape of Things to Come (Lost)


 * 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 User:SandyGeorgia 16:57, 15 July 2008.

The Shape of Things to Come (Lost)

 * Self-nominator: – thedemonhog   talk •  edits 

This good article is about an episode of fourth season of the television show Lost. Thanks to Mizu onna sango15 for copyediting it. – thedemonhog   talk •  edits  00:11, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment A few of the external links are dead. Go fix them.  – thedemonhog   talk  •  edits  00:13, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh sorry, I probably should have done that before I nominated the article. – thedemonhog   talk  •  edits  00:13, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. – thedemonhog   talk  •  edits  02:31, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment "and achieving a 5.3/14 in the key adults 18–49 demographic." – What do the numbers mean? Nielson Ratings, I assume, but this needs to be explained. Gary King ( talk ) 00:24, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * It is not that important to the average reader, so I just removed it completely. – thedemonhog   talk  •  edits  02:31, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Support, just a question though, why is it that the pictures are so small? They are completely overwhelmed by the prose.  Corn.u.co.pia ♥  Disc.us.sion  04:58, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments
 * What makes http://tvbythenumbers.com/ a reliable source?
 * Otherwise sources look good, all links check out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:12, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * They publish information on Nielsen Ratings that can be found nowhere else on the Internet by someone who is not a member of the press. Information that has been published elsewhere checks out.  – thedemonhog   talk  •  edits  19:36, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Comments pertaining to images:
 * Image:Dharka.jpg - purpose of "To illustrate an important scene" is not adequate. WP:RAT and WP:NFCC require rationales to be detailed, clear and relevant to each use.   Caption contains "filmed at a rock quarry"; why is a fair use image needed to convey this understanding (NFCC#1); what significant contribution to our understanding (NFCC#8) is really made by seeing the backs of characters/crew and equipment?
 * See WP:MOS regarding use of periods after complete sentences. ЭLСОВВОLД  talk 16:42, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Periods have been added. – thedemonhog   talk  •  edits  04:03, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Support another great article from WP:Lost. igordebraga ≠ 14:39, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * oppose neither of the two non-free images have valid FU rationales Fasach Nua (talk) 14:51, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Support pictures have adequate FU rationales, but could they be improved? Well referenced, written, all sections required are present and clear, intro could do with some rearranging:
 * 1st Paragraph - Details
 * 2nd Paragraph - Plot, characters
 * 3rd paragraph episode reception, etc.
 * But it is completely optional, other than this article is great. Should be promoted JTBX (talk) 15:04, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * How can "To illustrate a pivotal moment in the episode" be considered a detailed rationale? Is Illustration critical commentary? or is it just eye candy? Fasach Nua (talk) 10:24, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
 * How are the rationales now? Should Image:Dharka.jpg be replaced with an edited version of this or this?  – thedemonhog   talk  •  edits  22:58, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I dont see how either of those images convey anything about the rock quarry. Would it be possible to get a free image of the rock quarry? Fasach Nua (talk) 12:35, 13 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Yep, I have to agree about the rock quarry: it adds nothing the readers' understanding, and looks like an adornment. So ... it's a film set in a rock quarry, and that's what it looks like. See NFCC 3a and 8. LINKING: I've removed the autoformatted dates so the high-value links can breathe. It's still quite heavily linked, but better now. MOSNUM no longer encourages autoformatting. Hard-spaces added, too. Can you check that the numbers are consistently rendered as numerals? Usually it's 10 and above unless there's a reason for spelling one out (like start of sentence). Why is "assassin" linked? I see "blah. ... blah", so check MOS for spacing and number of ellipsis dots, which are better as sequences of periods rather than the symbol.... four without previous space when at a period, and ... spaced three when chopped mid-sentence. TONY   (talk)  10:10, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your comments and thanks especially for your changes to the article. The article actually has numbers consistently spelled out, unless decimals are involved.  – thedemonhog   talk  •  edits  20:20, 14 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Reviewing only image licensing: first one looks good, I think; I'm not sure about the quarry. --NE2 13:15, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The picture has been replaced due to its strong opposition. – thedemonhog   talk  •  edits  20:20, 14 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Notes; inconsistent WP:DASH usage (some unspaced emdashes, other spaced endashes), WP:MOS attn needed (spaces), WP:MOSNUM attention needed throughout (... the survivors' ninety-seventh day on the island... ), copyedit needs (glancing at the last sentence ... The San Diego Union-Tribune[42] Time, ... reveals missing comma), and times need WP:NBSP and correct formatting (9:00 PM ... see MOSDATE). Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 04:14, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I am not sure what the MOSNUM problem is. I suspect that you want "ninety-seventh" changed to "97th", but MOSNUM states that "numbers greater than nine may be rendered in numerals or may be rendered in words if they are expressed in one or two words". Everything else has been addressed.  Thanks, – thedemonhog   talk  •  edits  07:55, 15 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.