Wikipedia:Featured article review/Frank Klepacki/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was delisted by Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 4:57, 20 March 2021 (UTC).

Frank Klepacki

 * Notified: Zeality, WP Video games, WP Biography, WP Rock music, WP Dungeons & Dragons, 2021-01-24

Review section
The primary problems with this one seem to be that a number of the sources wouldn't be usable in a modern BLP FA, and that much of the article seems to be stuck in 2009. Hog Farm Talk 00:12, 21 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I agree. 99% of the sources would not meet the standards, many of the footnotes I hovered across are of his website. Way too many primary ones. 웃 O O  06:10, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 * 99%? So there is only one good source in the article? 98.32.192.121 (talk) 09:49, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd give a slightly different estimate - about 70% by my guess are either primary (interviews etc) or unreliable. Either way, the sourcing is nowhere near what is expected for current FAs. Hog Farm Talk 16:15, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment. Put bluntly, it doesn't appear like Mr. Klepacki has done much that is Wikipedia-notable since 2009, so I'm not sure I agree that the article being out-of-date is really an issue (re nom's comment that "article seems to be stuck in 2009").  He apparently did the soundtrack to Grey Goo and claims he won an award on his website (but awards are a dime a dozen these days, take with a large grain of salt), and I guess Command & Conquer Remastered Collection includes his soundtrack but that isn't actually new?  But very little in the "Works" section of the article post-2009 appears to have any importance at all: those are minor, forgotten games & albums that will have little critical commentary I presume, just bullet points on a list that shows he's still technically active.  SnowFire (talk) 07:24, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Even so, there still needs to be some prose to summarize all that. And to tie up loose ends like " Klepacki expressed a desire in 2009 to score an Unreal Tournament series game and a "generation one-style" Transformers game, as well as a blockbuster movie" - Did that ever happen?  And look for such like that.  So I guess the biggest issue here is the questionable sourcing. Hog Farm Talk 18:32, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Sometimes life be like that. If reliable sources haven't commented on it, then there's nothing Wikipedia can say.  That said, it looks like the Cinevegas link is broken, even in archive version?  The other reference for that line doesn't appear very substantial.  So I can see removing that line about Unreal Tournament & scoring a movie entirely (rather than attempt to find a most likely nonexistent source that says "Update: Klepacki's dreams went unfulfilled and his ambitions to score a blockbuster movie lie in tatters, you the reader's hopes are probably futile as well, all is lost.")   SnowFire (talk) 20:05, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
 * This whole article is outdated isn't it? Now we see the difference between old-school FAs and new-school FAs. - ias postb□x 15:47, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
 * To be fair, this article has a small number/amount of recent information, so there's only an untapped potential to get recent sources to more appear with newer info. On the prose side, so if this article is copyedited then it could be tidied up for a pro FA style. Ultimately, if the tasks are done properly, it seemingly remains FA in the end of the review. - ias postb□x 00:46-00:49, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Off topic moved to talk. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  02:00, 3 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Move to FARC, poor sourcing. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  02:00, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Move to FARC - sourcing is almost entirely primary or unreliable, per above, regardless of the discussion of datedness. Hog Farm Talk 17:18, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

FARC section

 * Issues raised in the review section include sourcing and currency. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:37, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Nikkimaria (talk) 14:57, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delist Article relies too much on a primary source. Z1720 (talk) 22:32, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delist - several unreliable sources are present, and the article is too heavily reliant on primary source interviews. Hog Farm Talk 04:15, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delist, poor sourcing, no progress made. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  17:17, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.