Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Simpsons Movie

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 00:15, 28 January 2008.

The Simpsons Movie[edit]

first FAC (14:19, August 8, 2007)

previous FAC (14:55, 14 January 2008)

Check external links

Okay about time this was done, in an organised fashion. I've been working on the page since May last year, alongside Alientraveller and some other much valued work from Scorpion and Buc. The first FAC was quick closed because someone nominated it about a month after the film was released, so it wasn't ready. The second was about a week ago, and was also withdrawn, although I'd have liked to see it go on. Anyway, I think its ready now, has had two PRs and a few copy-edits. All comments welcomed, thanks. Gran² 16:37, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion from peer review: Should there be a mention of the intro for He Loves to Fly and He D'ohs? Buc (talk) 21:17, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support Most of the issues I found I took care of with my copy-edit:

That quotebox is difficult to read with it being entirely in italics. Choose another quotebox (there's that blue one thats nice).

Changed.

Driver found recording her part "the funniest afternoon of her career",[28] and was disappointed when she was told the scene had been cut.[27] - this seems completely fan-crufty and tabloidy - please remove it all together.
- I've removed the second clause, but I think the first part is fine.
  - Hmmm, I still think its more magazine article material than encyclopedic; I mean it wasn't really the funniest afternoon of her life was it? That was just a off-the-cuff remark promoting her new venture.
    - Removed.
The environment is present in Homer's polluting of Lake Springfield, Green Day's cameo, and Lisa and Colin's romance. - rewrite that; the environment is present everywhere!
- Not really, at least I think they're the key points to be mentioned.

What I meant is it should be environmental concerns/environmentalism there, not environment. The sentence needs to be tweaked to "The theme of environmentalism is present in..."

I see, I'll change it.

is falted a word?
- I did a search in the current article, and the version before your copy-edit, and the word was not present either time.
  - "action sequences sometimes falte[d]."
    - Oh I see, it should be falter[d], looks like someone removed part of the word when copy-editing.
This caused outrage amongst local neopagans who performed "rain magic" to try and get it washed away. - that sentence sounds unintentionally funny to me. I mean, what!? :D
- Makes perfect sense to me, even if what happened seems a little silly.
  - Yeah, but what are "neopagans" and "rain magic"? Link them?
    - Neopagans is linked, and there's no relevant page for rain magic.
He found translating the song into Spanish the hardest to write. - again seems unnecessary.
- Seems fine to me, gives a view to Zimmer's specific problems.

But on the whole, bad-ass article, great work! indopug (talk) 10:58, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the support, and the copy-edit. I've answered your listed concerns underneath each of them, in case you still disagree. Gran² 17:32, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"The Empire State Building turned yellow." - please elaborate that, its not clear. Fix the external links. indopug (talk) 21:21, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The source just says it was turned yellow, it doesn't give any specifics, and I couldn't find anything else. And all the links work fine for me, am I missing a broken link? Gran² 22:04, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- Just wondering why so many links were romoved in the c/e? Buc (talk) 10:42, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Because they had all been linked several times before. Gran² 16:56, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yeah by I didn't they needed to remove quite so many. Buc (talk) 20:34, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This article I can say I've had absolutely nothing to do with, and it's really incredible on many levels. Just one question - you have currently (3) fair-use images in the article, which is fine, but also only (3) free-use images. Since the article is on the longer side - it would probably look nicer and be helped with a couple more free-use images in relevant sections, like in Development, of Matt Groening, in Casting, of a cast member, in Music, of Hans Zimmer... - you don't have to do all those suggestions, but 2 or so would be nice additions. Also, it couldn't hurt to buttress the fair-use rationales on all three fair-use images, by also adding {{Non-free fair use rationale}} to them. Cirt (talk) 23:10, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not really a fan of the non-free template, but as for the images, I'll see how they look later. Gran² 16:56, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support good job, impressive number of references and well-illustrated. igordebraga ≠ 02:44, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support: References, quality of writing, and substance all look great. Fantastic article. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 02:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Note; please address WP:OVERLINKing, sample edits left. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:18, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I've removed several links. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:25, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should there be a mention of the intro for He Loves to Fly and He D'ohs? Buc (talk) 10:01, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I think it should fit in like this:

===Continuity=== The opening sequence of He Loves to Fly and He D'ohs, the the season premiere of the first season to air after the realise of the film, contained numerous references to the film. Buc (talk) 18:13, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An entire section for one sentence? Personally, I think it's a tad trivial. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 18:15, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's probably my main problem with mentioning it. I mean, it's not that important is it? And if we include, then we'll have to include every single mention of the movie in the show that is ever made. And that isn't really very encyclopedic. Gran² 18:19, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. 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.