Talk:Martin Keamy

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleMartin Keamy is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 2, 2008Good article nomineeListed
September 30, 2008Featured article candidatePromoted
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on July 7, 2008.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Canadian actor Kevin Durand, who plays antagonist Martin Keamy in the fourth season of the television show Lost, is a former rapper and stand-up comic?
Current status: Featured article

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Martin Keamy/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review. I have read and checked the article per WP:WIAGA, and have the following notes (nothing significant mostly):

  • Intro: "Keamy is revealed to have a much more significant role" - redundant information with the following sentences
  • "Unlike Lost's ensemble of characters who the writers say each have good and bad intentions" - awkward grammar, maybe say "Unlike Lost's ensemble of characters who according to the writers each have good and bad intentions"
  • Arc: all his his military stuff happened before the time setting of the story, so it should use simple present (edit: I meant simple past) there
  • "Once he catures Ben" - typo
  • "Mayhew" (twice) - typo?
  • "which harrases the mercenaries" - typo
  • "then obtains the "secondary protocol" from a safe using two keys—one is his; the other is forcibly taken from the captain Gault (Grant Bowler)" and "During the standoff, Gault arrives and holds Keamy at gunpoint, having learned of Keamy's mission to torch the island; however, Keamy is quick enough to grab a gun and kill Gault" - IMO unnecessary plot detail that can be trimmed, but feel free to disagree
  • "Keamy learns about about a 1980s research station" - double word
  • "despite his knowledge that this kills all who are aboard the freighter" - reads a little like an afterthought of little significance. Maybe turn into a new sentence and say that the freighter did indeed blow up, killing Michael (at least), as a significant event
  • Personality: "That doesn't bode we'll for our Losties [antagonists]" - (1) I know the source made the mistake, but it really should say "well" not "we'll" (or slap a {{sic}} on it). Also, I think you wanted to say "protagonists", not antagonists.
  • "they "are interested in exploring how good and evil can be embodied in the same characters and [the writers are also interested in] the struggles" - having "[be] interested" twice doesn't flow well
  • Casting: the first sentence seems out of context and doesn't make sense until later on
  • "when he won the part. When he was shooting," - "when" twice
  • "in "The Shape of Things to Come" when" - needs comma before "when"
  • Casting section should be named Development because the second paragraph is not about casting at all
  • Reception: "In a review of the season finale Erin Martell" - needs comma before Erin (I think)
  • "Lost's camoflaged baddie" - should be "camouflaged", probably slap a {{sic}} on it
  • not sure the Keamy's Paradise blog will live up to the test of time
  • General: please link episodes in the article for reader convenience
  • Image:Martin Keamy.png has two licenses, as a promo and a screenshot - which is it?

No problems otherwise (MOS, images and the FURs, sources etc.). Please address the majority of the above points within the next seven days; I won't make a fuzz if some points (like the prose suggestions) get ignored, as minor imperfections are alright in Good Articles (I am not saying my notes are gold though, but some peer-reviewy suggestions can't hurt). This article is on my watchlist, so just leave a note here when you think you're done. Thank you for your work so far. – sgeureka t•c 16:23, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most concerns have been dealt with. Mayhew is not a typo. I was unsure of how to address your third and penultimate points, so could you do them? The image is kind of a promo of a screenshot. What do you think about this going to FAC? Would you say that it is too short or as comprehensive as possible so length does not matter? Finally, I recommend checking out Keamy's Paradise and/or its YouTube video. Thanks, –thedemonhog talk • edits 18:05, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed the two things and rewrote one sentence, so I'll pass the article in a minute. The article is longer than 20kB, so there is some FA potential, but it's still more of a borderline case and it depends on what reviewers pass by... I just got an FAC oppose for incomprehensiveness in a 55kB article :-), fortunately easily fixable. But the sources are FA-worthy (except for the blog) and the prose is nearly FA-quality (as far as I can tell), if that's what you worry about. – sgeureka t•c 19:45, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Was Keamy Infected?[edit]

I have put up several times and don't want to get into an edit war. But in Episode 78 the shape of things to come, when Keamy has learned about Kevin Johnson's duplicity with Ben Linus, Captain Gault implies to Keamy that he and his team 'may be suffering from' I don't remember the exact wording, but I believe the word Dementia was used, which to me implied that something abnormal may have happened to Keamy on the island, which is consistent with what Rousseau has said happened to her team when they first shipwrecked on the island. Again, this is LOST and a lot of answers are still to come. But if "Others" truely are carriers of the disease and if this disease seems to strike those that 'don't belong on the island at all' (and thus, the reason the castaways have not been infected is that the Island tolerates their precence, then it seems possible or even likely that the sickness (and Danielle was not specificd about it being a physical or mental sickness) that Keamy's complete change in attitude and such was due to him suffering from being on the island. Whippletheduck (talk) 16:01, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Favorism?[edit]

I find it odd how Keamy gets an article when Mikhail, who made the same amount of appearances, and Richard, who made 4 more appearances don't. He know about the same amount of information on them. So, this is seemin like a game of favorism here... Skeletal S.L.J.C.O.A.A.A.T.R. 23:59, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Come on, chant with me: AfD! AfD! –thedemonhog talk • edits 00:50, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You want an article for Mikhail and Richard? So write an article about them. All of the current information about them neatly fits into the character list, and that's where they are going to stay per WP:AVOIDSPLIT until someone (why not you?) volunteers to locate significant amounts of real-world information. – sgeureka t•c 13:53, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not saying that I'd like an article for them, I'm just saying that we have about the same amount of information on them as we do, Keamy. And by having an article about Keamy, and not those two, just makes it seem like favorism. Skeletal S.L.J.C.O.A.A.A.T.R. 20:37, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keamy has ~1300 words of real-world information currently on wikipedia, while Mikhail and Richard have 0. The length of a plot summary should be carefully balanced with the length of the other sections, and since M&K have no "other" sections, you'll see that your assertion that they "have about the same amount of information" is wrong. If you meant information [not yet added to wikipedia], then it's the WP:BURDEN of those wanting to have an article for them, to dig up the info and write the article, not blanket-give an article to possibly not-notable-enough secondary characters and dive into excessive plot detail. – sgeureka t•c 10:43, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And another point is, Keamy's dead (So is Mikhail) but, chances are, why bother having an article for an 8-timer, who's got an article filled with popularity? Merges have been happening on lots of articles (IE: Sonic characters) most of which are un-necasary, and were merged because they're un-populary. Blaze the Cat is much more important to the Sonic series, than Keamy is to Lost. I noticed that even a fansite blog has been referenced here? What purpose does it serve? The only reason Keamy has an article, is because he's so popular. I can dig up as much (If not, more) info on Richard, who's made more appearances, and is confirmed for future ones. Skeletal S.L.J.C.O.A.A.A.T.R. 06:53, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand what you want to accomplish by accusing others of favorism. Do you want others to create articles on Mikhail and Richard (something you can do yourself) or do you want the article on Keamy to be deleted/merged (something that's not likely to happen)? Jackieboy87 (talk) 13:00, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, there is no such thing as favorism (that's not the only spelling mistake). You say that you are not asking for articles on Richard and Mikhail, but that you are just speculating that this is a game of favoritism and even if it was, I am not sure why it matters. It is not enough on Wikipedia to state that something is important or notable—you must prove it by citing sources. I am not sure what is happening with the Sonic characters, but my guess is that no one is establishing their notability. Regardless, that falls under other stuff exists. There are two reasons why Keamy has an article: He has been covered by many reliable secondary sources, but more importantly, I took the time to extract information from them and add citations. The fan blog probably should be removed, but it cannot be used as an argument against the worthiness of the article because in no way does it (alone) establish the subject's notability. If by popular, you mean that a lot of people like Keamy so a page has gradually built up, then I suggest that you check the history and diffs. Is there more information out there on Richard than Keamy? Possibly, but that is irrelevant (see last wikilink). –thedemonhog talk • edits 13:42, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Explain how Richard is irrelevant. I think that we can easily sum up Keamy in the list of characters page. Just like Richard, Mikhail, Naomi, etc. If Richard becomes important next year, we'll give him an article. I'm sure that once this article is stripped clean of the useless info, it won't stand a chance. Skeletal S.L.J.C.O.A.A.A.T.R. 15:29, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Richard argument is invalid per WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. And where is this "useless info" that you speak of? –thedemonhog talk • edits 15:47, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Both Arc & Reception are longer than they need to be. Reception only needs a quick couple of sentences. Arc, needs to be changed to Season 4. You're making it sound like it's the Keamy Show. A couple of the references are fansites, and blogs. Skeletal S.L.J.C.O.A.A.A.T.R. 15:50, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So your plan is to delete sourced information (from a GA no less) so that you can have the article merged back into Characters of Lost, all because there aren't articles for Mikhail and Alpert (as well as some unrelated Sonic characters)? That is just plain crazy. Jackieboy87 (talk) 16:02, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it's not only because of those, it's because, Keamy's really too minor a character to have his own article. We should even think about merging Nikki, Paulo, Ethan and Christian. I mean, plenty of other GA articles were stripped of it due to merges. Why should this one (Which is worse than the others) ,be any different? Because he has a large fanbase? I don't think so... Skeletal S.L.J.C.O.A.A.A.T.R. 16:44, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What does his fanbase have to do with this? And please read/skim over the Wikipedia:Notability guideline and Wikipedia:Other stuff exists essay. –thedemonhog talk • edits 16:55, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the purpose of WIKIPEDIA is for users to make their own edits. It is totally irrelevent if Keamy happens to have a lot of people who loved/hated/love2hate the guy and thus has contributed to his Wikipedia article being as large as it is for someone that only appeared in a few episodes. That is a testament to his character and his actor Kevin Durand. The point being, that when people start posting more on Miles or Richard, they will get their big articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whippletheduck (talk • contribs) 16:04, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

There's a mistake in the references, the last two references both link to the same place. Sanders11 (talk) 13:58, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed it. Jackieboy87 (talk) 21:55, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Martin Keamy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:56, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Martin Keamy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:47, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Martin Keamy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:43, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Martin Keamy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:07, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Martin Keamy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:43, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Martin_Keamy&oldid=1208833188"