Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Lion King/archive6

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 not promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 01:39, 16 August 2008 [1].

The Lion King[edit]

Nominator(s): DrNegative (talk)
previous FAC


I believe this article, after many failed nominations, is ready to make featured article status. This article very recently went through a Peer review and a good copyedit to improve its quality. Please let me know if there are any errors, and I will correct them as soon as possible. Also, feel free to help!

Thanks, DrNegative (talk) 03:20, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • oppose Most if not all the sections (apart from the Plot section) need expanding. BUC (talk) 11:14, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Please try to be more specific. What sections do you feel are too short and why? DrNegative (talk) 23:30, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose OK, so this is my favourite film ever, so I'm not going to be easy to please; but I still don't think this article is FA quality yet. That said, I'll help out where I can. — Rmrfstar 17:13, August 9, 2008 — continues after insertion below
  • Lede
  • A lede should summarise the whole article, plot, production, etc.
  • Plot summary - say something about Scar, the death of Simba's father, and maybe even the hyenas "taking over the Pride land".
  • Discuss the style, the music, etc. here.
  • ==Plot==
  • This section needs a lot of work... even a complete rewrite. Study WP:WAF. Also, there are a lot of factual errors and places where you guess or assume too much. If you want to analyse the plot, do so, but cite! See below.
    • The plot just recieved a re-write and copy-edit. I will try to fix your problems listed but Im not that good with Plots so if anyone else can help that would be great. DrNegative (talk) 23:30, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Don't use the word "queen" to describe Sarabi; I'm pretty sure it's not used in the film.
  • I would not call Rafiki a "shaman" unless you can source it. Certainly, he seems to act like the stereotype, but that's not enough.
  • I don't think there's any indication in the film that Scar is "plotting" to kill Mufasa and/or Simba during the Circle of Life scene. He does say "... perhaps you shouldn't turn your back on me", but that's hardly "plotting"...
  • Explain the concept of the "Circle of Life, the delicate balance affecting all living things."
  • Zazu is not Mufasa's "adviser", he is the majordomo.
  • "hyena sightings in the Pride Lands" - explain the territorial dispute.
    • The movie never really establishes why the Hyenas are not allowed in the Pride-lands (excluding the destruction they caused while Simba was gone). The viewers are just left to assume that its "against the rules" so to speak. Please clarify and I will fix it. DrNegative (talk) 02:21, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • In the natural wild they are more like scavengers. Is that what you meant? DrNegative (talk) 02:23, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "about the elephant graveyard, a place where Mufasa has forbidden Simba to go" - Explain which elephant graveyard.
    • There was only one "Elephant Graveyard" mentioned in the movie that I am aware of. Please clarify. DrNegative (talk) 02:17, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "eludes Zazu" - either explain why he was being followed or take this out.
  • Scar's hyenas" - are they his pets? ;)
  • "Scar is furious" - actually, I don't think he is.
  • "Scar is furious that his plan has failed, and gains the loyalty of hyenas by claiming that if he becomes king, they'll "never go hungry again" ("Be Prepared")." - Perhaps now would be the time to introduce the regicide bit.
  • Shorten the summary of Mufasa's death significantly. The exact method (the fall, etc.) is not important for the reader.
  • "the pride" - which pride? Say it's Mufasa's...
  • "Still mourning, they are told the hyenas are now part of the pride." - Not exactly. The hyenas are just allowed to enter the Pride Lands.
  • "their 'Hakuna Matata' lifestyle." - "Hakuna Matata" is not an adjective.
  • "the two fall in love" - this is conjectural.
    • I understand what you are saying but how would I re-write this? It never mentions that they are in love but it seems self-evident because of the song's lyrics. DrNegative (talk) 00:57, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "indirectly persuades Simba"
  • "is shocked to see the condition of the Pride Lands" - explain why they are they way they are. Explain how they look. Perhaps, "desolate, being poorly governed by Scar".
  • ==Musical==
  • Proper summary style requires more than a sentence here. The "short paragraph" mentioned in peer review should actually be a paragraph. In addition to a summary of The Lion King (musical); there should specifically be a summary of the differences between the musical and the film.
    • Added a paragraph for clarity. Could use other users input here if needed... DrNegative (talk) 23:30, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Source what material is there.
  • ==Controversies==
  • "Disney's official stance is that any resemblance is coincidental, and directors Roger Allers and Rob Minkoff stated that they were well into the development process before the Kimba similarity was identified." - source, please?

The rest of the article is not too bad. Still, the "lede", "plot summary", and "muscial" sections need serious work. Do you want to say anything the alleged easter eggs besides the "SEX"? Some monkeys pull a Mickey Mouse out of Zazu?'s ear during "I just can't wait to be king". See here.-- Rmrfstar (talk) 17:13, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I re-worked the lede a bit; but I still think there needs to be a paragraph in it dealing with the artistic qualities of the film. Also, the Broadway adaptation should be mentioned there. -- Rmrfstar (talk) 18:18, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The second paragraph of "Production" comes out of nowhere. I ask myself, reading this, why did the story need "revamping"? This question needs to be answered.
  • NPOV is a big issue. I've had to alter a few phrases like "Story head, Brenda Chapman, gave insight to the challenge of the story". Does the writing of every single original script mentioned in Wikipedia deserve to be called "challenging"? I actually commented out this entire paragraph, because most of it has nothing to do with The Lion King but rather writing films in general. The only thing worthwhile in this paragraph was the factoid that in the original conception Simba hangs around after Mufasa's death. See you can incorporate this fact elsewhere in the article.
  • ==Production== is a "wall of text". It needs some subsectioning.
  • The helicopter crash has nothing to do with the film's "Production".
  • All this Jim Folwer info is great; but it'd be a lot better if the article mentioned that the characters in The Lion King actually mimic real life lions because of his influence. Say "Simba and Nala" butt heads, etc. "Inspired him to incorporate these elements into the design" is not strong enough; it doesn't say that he actually did it!
  • Question: Is the area, "The Pride Lands" modelled after the Serengeti?
Phrases like "pride lands", "circle of life" and "pride rock" need to be explained (better) when they are mentioned. Describing the latter as "the delicate balance affecting all living things" is not good enough at all.
I see you added "the condition of the Pride Lands"; but this leaves the reader asking "What was the condition of the Pride Lands?" Can we discuss how Scar and his bad governance is responsible?
I've copyedited through the first half of the plot summary. I'll return again. -- Rmrfstar (talk) 18:18, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I have done some work on the article and I agree in general it is not quite ready for FA status yet. Not all the references use the cite template, which I think would be good if they did, and some areas can be expanded. I have done some work on the plot section, but most of it was written a long time ago and can be improved. I have reduced the amount of inappropriate wording and details, but some still remains while a few bits might need to be made clearer. The images look generally all right, I have cleaned up the fair use rationales though some might have more that can be added to them. I will continue to try and work on the article for the time being. Camaron | Chris (talk) 19:08, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The article does not need both a VHS cover and a film poster per WP:NFCC#3 Fasach Nua (talk) 10:46, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • There isn't a VHS cover, I assume you mean the DVD cover. There are currently 7 fair use images in the article which is quite a lot, and given the similarities to the poster and DVD cover, I am willing to agree and will remove the latter for now. Camaron | Chris (talk) 11:00, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I wouldn't worry too much about quantity, the thing to worry about is WP:NFCC, they all seem to be the subject of critical commentary or used in identiying the main characters. I'm not convinced the Simpson's one is justified, but the rest seem fine Fasach Nua (talk) 11:06, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree that the others are generally all right, I do not think The Simpson's one is blatantly bad, but it is a bit more trivial than the others so if another should go I would say that one. Camaron | Chris (talk) 11:18, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments:
    • "Movie Poster for The Lion King" would read better as "The film's theatrical release poster" (in the infobox).
    • Do all of those actors truly have "starring" roles? If not, that list needs to be cut down (in the infobox).
    • "Domestic" and "Foreign" box-offices grosses are not needed. The worldwide gross is fine (in the infobox).
    • Do either of the two Plot images really add anything? Or justify fair use policies?
      • I think they help the viewer get an image of the characters while reading the plot. WP:WIAFA , line 3. I will remove if other editors feel they are not appropiate for the article. DrNegative (talk) 23:30, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • This is really a personal preference, but if you have a cast section, I don't think you need to include the actor’s names in brackets in the plot section.
    • I think the production section needs a bit more information, if available.
      • I agree. Disney has always been secretive of their production of feature films it seems. Ill try to find more info to expand. DrNegative (talk) 23:30, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Expanded Production section quite a bit. Let me know what you think. DrNegative (talk) 09:41, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • The structure of the article isn't very clear. Music should be after production. Controversies and impact should be with Reaction. Musical should be merged with Sequels and spin-offs, which should be at the end of the article.

Those are the main things I saw after a quick glance at the article. Gran2 10:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comments by Sillyfolkboy:
    • The last peer review was archived for some reason unbeknownst to me (auto-close with an FA nomination?) and only half of my recommendations have been followed. Contrary to what User:PeerReviewBot says - the discussion is very much still open as far as I'm concerned. The previous half of the peer review has been transcluded as it was largely dealt with but the second half still remains untouched - please can the nominator or other interested editor adjust the article to my recommendations? See them here. Thank you. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 18:32, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I fixed almost all of these today. Need a little more time for the last few. DrNegative (talk) 23:30, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • I've fixed the referencing format myself (the problem was using work instead of publisher). Three obvious problems remain:
          • "Vogler, Christopher (1998). The Writer's Journey: Mythic Structure For Writers." Expand this info (try a cite book template)
          • ""The True Lion King of Africa: The Epic History of Sundiata, King of Old Mali.". Convert this to a book reference.
          • "'Presentation Reel' extra on the Lion King Platinum Edition DVD" change this to the same formatting as the rest. (e.g. "The Lion King: Platinum Edition (Disc 1) [DVD]. Walt Disney Home Video.")
  • Categories - Xhosa-language films, Swahili-language films, Zulu-language films : Are these included purely because of the character names? If so I would remove them, I don't remember any character actually talking in an African language. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 14:36, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well the language categories say in the films it is "mainly or partially spoken". It is used for names but it is not really spoken, so I would agree with removing them. Camaron | Chris (talk) 16:45, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question Where is the nominator? The peer review suggestions and those discussed here need to be addressed. -- Rmrfstar (talk) 19:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sorry, I have been real busy lately but I have addressed alot of these today and plan on addressing alot more ASAP. DrNegative (talk) 23:30, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • That's cool. I see you've addressed some of my objections. I'll review the matters again in a few hours. Thanks! -- Rmrfstar (talk) 09:37, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question Shouldn't the "Plot" section follow the "Lead" instead of "Production"? Im just curious as so I will know about the formatting in the future. DrNegative (talk) 00:46, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I reversed them. I know it now doesn't comply with Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Style guidelines. Still, I'd like the character list to precede the summary, and it seemed weird to have the character list be the first section. I don't know what to do, besides maybe integrate the character list into the plot summary. -- Rmrfstar (talk) 08:53, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment — This article is tagged as undergoing a major edit, one of the statements has a Who tag, and the "Sequels and spin-offs" needs some citations. Why don't you withdraw the nomination and hold off until you can fully improve it? Believe me, I've gotten three articles on animated films featured. Having as many problems as this article does is not very good. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 03:48, 14 August 2008 (UTC))[reply]
The major edit tag was added by me, and then accidently? re-added by someone else in reverting some of my changes. I do agree that this article still needs a lot of work. -- Rmrfstar (talk) 08:53, 14 August 2008 (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/The_Lion_King/archive6&oldid=232228655"