Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Frank's Cock/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 17:34, 15 November 2012 [1].

Frank's Cock edit

Featured article candidates/Frank's Cock/archive1

Nominator(s): — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:18, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article because I think it is a thorough look at an interesting and fairly significant short film. This is admittedly a bit different than my usual FAC material, but I'm certain you'll find it an engaging read. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:18, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Addressed comments from TBrandley moved to talk

Support on all criteria. TBr and ley 03:11, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the review! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:10, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support - most of my concerns were answered in the peer review, with just a few more minor points:

"first venture at directly addressing" - I think this should be either "first attempt at directly addressing" or "first venture directly addressing"

Done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:38, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"After pondering how to complete the film...chose to complete the film" - repetitive

Done — Crisco 1492 (talk)

"In screenings Frank's Cock was later marketed" - don't think "later" fits here, either it was marketed during the screenings or after them

Done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:38, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"films regarding the disease had appeared...had appeared in 1985" - repetitive

Done — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:48, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"early gay pioneers with AIDS" - by "pioneers" do you mean activists or open spokespeople, or just any gay person with AIDS?

Source has "artists", changed to that (he gives Vito Russo and Arthur J. Bressan, Jr. as examples from the first generation). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:48, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Were there any copyright concerns raised about the clips appropriated for the non-original quadrants?

None that I could find. Hoolboom's views on copyright can be read here, and I doubt he would have cared either way. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:38, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"touted the short as expressing, humour, and sexual obsession" - is that a stray comma after "expressing", or do you mean "expressive"? (Or is this a quote?)

That's a typo. Done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:38, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cole: page range should use endash

Done — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:38, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Check alphabetization of References. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:46, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review and support! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:38, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Well written, meticulously sourced, educational and encyclopedic. However, like Nikkimaria (talk · contribs), I've just got a few minor points that could be addressed:

Any chance of an image for the infobox? Some sort of movie poster, or something like that?

Haven't found anything like that. Theoretically we could put the screencap there, but it works better next to where it is discussed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:10, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could we perchance get a See also section, with suggestions for the reader of between 3-5 articles they might be interested in, and also some links to related portals?
Suggest adding a Further reading section, with recommendations of 4-6 books or scholarly articles or other sources of further reading for the reader within the more general topics discussed, not necessarily relating specifically to the film?

I'll look into these two. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:10, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a bit of both. Not sure on the relevance of the further reading selection, but it would likely provide good background knowledge for the interested reader. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:27, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your efforts on this high quality article, — Cirt (talk) 01:30, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:10, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support - I reviewed this for GA - I found the prose very warm and engaging, really a nice read, and it is comprehensive as well. I can't think of anything else to improve. Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:47, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for everything! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:51, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support - very interesting read. Meets FA criteria.--Dwaipayan (talk) 06:36, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:52, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Pretty small article, but well researched! It's a pleasant read and I'm impressed with your notes and referencing. Nice job!--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 01:38, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delegate notes -- picky referencing things:

Couldn't see where McIntosh appeared in the citations -- perhaps the ref belongs in a Further Reading section.

I had added the author after adding the reference and neglected to update the short references.

Inconsistent formatting for multiple authors: "Rush and Baughman 1997" vs. " Reinke & Henricks 1997" (actually, I believe the best method is to mirror the full reference format that uses a semi-colon, e.g. "Reinke; Henricks 1997", but it's not a deal-breaker for me).

Standardised to "&", as that is default for SFN.

Why is Ann Arbor Film Festival abbreviated "AA Film Fest" while Toronto International Film Festival is abbreviated TIFF? Unless these differ because they're official abbreviations, they should be consistent.

I was going based on website names, but it appears Ann Arbor also uses AAFF. Changed.

Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:57, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the nitpicks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:31, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image check -- adequate FUR for screenshot, portrait released with OTRS. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 17:27, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.