Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Animaniacs

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 16:28, 18 November 2007.

Animaniacs[edit]

Hello, this is a self nomination of the article. It's passed GA requirements, and I believe the article is of Featured Artcile quality now. Everything looks well organized and cited. Thanks, Gak Blimby 18:45, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - Meets the criteria, readable, well-referenced and pleasing to the eye. Only a little problem - red links should be adressed or removed. --Shahid • Talk2me 23:29, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Done OK, I got rid of every red link but the one for the cartoon series Detention because it is relevant to Warner Bros. animation history and an article may be created about it in the future. Gak Blimby 23:46, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Note, there's nothing wrong with redlinks, and their removal is not a requirement for FA status. On the other hand, if a term is not adequately defined in the article, then the redlink can be stubbified or a definition provided in the article. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:59, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • Concur in general with SandyGeorgia. Removal of redlinks are not an explicit requirement for FA status. However, this can be somewhat covered under "...the best Wikipedia has to offer..." Personally, I would prefer there be no red links, but I will not oppose an FA nom on this issue. — BQZip01 — talk 21:01, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Object This article doesn't meet 1(a). From the first paragraph of the body (where I started):
    • "Although Animaniacs had been set in Burbank, California,[2] the series took place in various places and periods of times."—did the location move later? Why not simply "is set in"? If the series took place "in various places", is it fair to say it's set in Burbank?
    • "The Animaniacs characters also interacted with..." Why also?
    • "Although characters from Animaniacs acted in their own segments..." Is the alternative even possible? (Characters did not act in their own segments?)
      •  Done I removed the sentence, as it didn't belong in that section anyways. Gak Blimby 03:31, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Animaniacs segments had varied in both length and setting", "Animaniacs segments ranged in time...", and "Although some episodes went on for longer or shorter periods" all in the same paragraph, and all say the same thing.
      •  Done Only one sentence says it now. Gak Blimby 03:31, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • All throughout this paragraph there are strange tense uses. "Andrea Romano... had said that the Warners had functioned to..." instead of "Andrea Romano... said that the Warners function to...", etc.
    • Three of the eight sentences start with "Although"—try to mix things up and not reuse the same sentence format too much.
    • One sentence is missing a period.
If the entire article is of this quality, you need to enlist the help of some good copy editors to help rework things. Pagrashtak 21:38, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm going to do a check of the rest of the article to look for what else is not up to par. Gak Blimby 22:44, 8 October 2007 (UTC) Done[reply]
  • I don't have time to read the entire article right now, but I read random pieces and the prose seemed fine, so I'll strike my objection. Pagrashtak 22:08, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pass & support

  • On the basis that it's fine. Learnedo 07:20, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support, but there are things to fix. Here are just examples.

  • "The studio's first series, Tiny Toon Adventures, was a success among younger viewing audiences, and it attracted a sizable number of adult viewers as well." Try: "The studio's first series, Tiny Toon Adventures, was a success among younger viewers, and attracted a sizable number of adult viewers."
  • You couldn't list in running form, separated by commas in the infobox? That would save its huge vertical range, which causes bad formatting at the bottom.
Unfortunately, when I tried that, it changed the infobox length only a little and made it hard to read. Gak Blimby 22:03, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Read up on ellipses at MOS. Need to be spaced. MOS breach in the final punctuation in quotes, which should be outside the quote unless it belongs in the original.
  • "won it's last"—ouch.
    •  Done Although I didn't really consider it a problem. Gak Blimby 22:03, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • "forty", but "8". Please read MOS on this.
  • I like that fact that almost all of the dates are unlinked/autoformatted. Pity a few still are, though. Tony (talk) 16:21, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support although I preferred the other WB animations, the article is in great shape, well written and referenced. Hope Pinky and the Brain gets the FA treatment as well... igordebraga ≠ 17:29, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Meets the criteria; comprehensive, well-written and well-referenced. Good use of images.--Opark 77 15:37, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support i'm impressed Legalbeaver 21:56, 14 November 2007 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Animaniacs&oldid=1089085692"