Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Bale Out/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
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 SandyGeorgia 15:25, 30 November 2009 [1].

Bale Out edit

Nominator(s): Cirt (talk) 09:01, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

This article has been through AFD, appeared at DYK, successfully became a GA, and had a peer review. I believe it meets the criteria and I place it here for your consideration. Thank you for your time, Cirt (talk) 09:01, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Awadewit image clearance moved to talk. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:39, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support on 2c Decline. Fifelfoo (talk) 22:37, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Date format inconsistent Month D, YYYY versus YYYY-MM-DD pick one, stick to it.
fn23 staff author not named / [Staff]. In general with staff, where staff is assumed you should use Square Brackets around the author to indicate assumption. Please correct where you've assumed staff authors rather than the byline indicating staff.
Locations please "The Daily Telegraph" is the name of a number of papers, and the one in London is not notable enough to be obvious without specification. The Times is the only newspaper with that right.
fn23 Hero Complex is an independently published magazine, not a supplement?
Comment This barely meets notability guidelines, the difference between February and May of 2009 being not particularly large in my mind as instances of multiple reportage meaning its more than a flash in the pan. But "Barely" in binary is the same as definitively. Fifelfoo (talk) 10:44, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Responses:
Date formats are now uniform throughout the article, using Month D, YYYY.
Added "staff" field, for this cite. Added square brackets around "staff", where this is assumed, as suggested, above.
Noted location for The Daily Telegraph.
fn23 Hero Complex is a blog published by the Los Angeles Times. Cirt (talk) 12:57, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment tell us the date in the first sentence, not the second paragraph. Amandajm (talk) 11:59, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Thank you, Cirt (talk) 12:01, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Source comments Everything fine. RB88 (T) 01:20, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) Cirt (talk) 06:17, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support: I've been following this page since the very beginning (as I made the Lucian Piane article) so I'm pretty familiar with it. I think it's a brilliant little entry, and it's particularly well sourced. Below are my comments: Thanks Cirt! — Hunter Kahn (c) 01:09, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lead:
  • I would suggest some reference to the fact that Christian Bale himself liked the remix should be added to the lead. One of my first thoughts when I open the article is to wonder whether Bale himself has seen it or responded to it, so I think it's worth including right at the top. This could just be thrown right in at the end of the second paragraph...
Background:
  • Ref number 9 is dead. Could you see if you can fix it (maybe Web Archive has an archived copy of it; the site was down when I did this review it or I'd have checked myself). Or you could just drop the citation altogether, since the only two times you use ref #9 is along with another citation...
  • "...continued shooting for seven hours after the incident." Perhaps because ref #9 is dead, the other reference doesn't include the "seven hours" information, unless I'm missing it. Can you add a citation that includes that, or otherwise drop the seven hours thing?
  • Ref number 11 mentions that TMZ broke the news of the Bale outburst back in July when it occurred, but that it didn't become a widely publicized story until months later when they got the audio. Could you add this to the second paragraph?
Composition:
  • "...during a speech given by U.S. Senator John Kerry at the University of Florida." You have three citation tags after this sentence. Unless I'm missing something, ref # 13 doesn't include the information in the aforementioned sentence (although the other two citations do.) If I'm right, drop ref #13 from here...
Reception:
  • "The Wall Street Journal wrote that Piane combined Bale's language with "a driving house music track." I'm not seeing that at the source... — Hunter Kahn (c) 14:22, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much for the comments, I will respond to these soon. Cirt (talk) 22:07, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Responses to Hunter Kahn
  1. Done. Added requested info to the lede.
  2. From your last edited version [2], ref 9 was [3], this link does not seem to be dead, it works fine for me.
  3. The three different cites at the end of this sentence back up different parts of the sentence.
    • Please point out to me where the "seven hours" bit is. I can't find it in any of the three sources, but I'm probably just missing it... — Hunter Kahn (c) 00:36, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • It was from the Boston Herald cite, the article at their website has since been archived but this does not affect WP:V. In addition, I have added another cite for this. Cirt (talk) 00:55, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Done. Added that additional info, as suggested.
  5. The three different cites at the end of the sentence back up different parts of the sentence.
  6. This info actually is in the cited reference. Check the caption in the lower left picture of Bale.

Cirt (talk) 23:57, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • In terms of comprehensiveness, this article seems pretty solid. Majorly talk 19:58, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I dislike See also sections - could some of those links be incorporated into the article? The mashup link, for example, could easily be as mashups are described. Majorly talk 20:01, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, you make a good point. I trimmed the See also subsection down by two terms, and incorporated those into the body text of the article. Cirt (talk) 22:58, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support Watching the traffic stats for this article is fascinating! Wikipedia now has an excellent summary of this internet meme. I've copyedited the article a bit and checked all of the sources. The only further change I would recommend is removing the last sentence of the article, which adds very little to the article and relies on two sources that just barely pass WP:V. I wonder of Piane could be persuaded to release the remix under a free license? His 15 minutes are up on that and it could be put into articles like remix, if we had it, which would give him much more publicity. Awadewit (talk) 18:24, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I removed that sentence, as recommended. I also contacted Piane, and suggested to him the idea of releasing the remix by a free license. Cirt (talk) 18:34, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Good example of WP:NOTCENSORED ;). Well written and concise article. Great work. ceranthor 02:03, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bale threatened to quit the film if Hurlbut repeated the error and was not subsequently fired.[10][12] - ambiguous wording.
  • Since it's on a pop culture thing, it makes sense that a lot of references are news articles, but if you could link to anything scholarly (if there is anything like that out there) that would be awesome.
  1. Revised that sentence [4].
  2. Found one interesting source - added info from English doctoral student at North Carolina State University, [5].

Cirt (talk) 08:58, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Bale_Out/archive1&oldid=1138455343"