Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Super Bowl XXXVIII halftime show controversy/archive1

Super Bowl XXXVIII halftime show controversy

Nominator(s): Andrewlp1991 (talk)

• Featured article candidates/Super Bowl XXXVIII halftime show controversy/archive1

I'm nominating this article for featured article because...it's a well-sourced article that documents the heavy cultural impact of a half-second accident that occurred on national TV in 2004 and affected future broadcast law in the US for times to come. Also, I'd like to try getting this as the TFA on Feb. 1, 2009 - coincidentially this year's Super Bowl!

As for the FA criteria, so far it's been stable and of course well-sourced and very comprehensive. Since 2007 I've researched this incident for editing this article, especially with excellent source The Decency Wars by Frederick S. Lane. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 06:17, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

• Image review — issues as follows:
  • File:Janet Jackson & Justin Timberlake's wardrobe malfunction.jpg requires a stronger fair use rationale other than "to illustrate the incident, which was notable", made light by its boilerplate nature (same rationale for Janet Jackson article). Something along the line of why this image is particularly associative with the event (is this the most circulated picture in the media, why is this scene particularly poignant of the incident) should be made.
    • I am asking another editor for his opinion on the rewritten rationale. Jappalang (talk) 22:03, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
  • File:Fcc complaints and fines 2001-2004.JPG requires sources for the number of complaints and amount of fines.
    • Please include the FCC page where the chart is found, so that it will be easier on the maintenance (in case they rename the path or file). Jappalang (talk) 22:03, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

No other image issues. Jappalang (talk) 02:24, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

• • I've dealt with these issues by adding some more reasons for the fair use image and sourcing the FCC website for the chart. --Andrewlp1991 (talk) 05:29, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Oppose I have not spent a long time reading the article, but I see some major problems with the article content.

• The article has no international perspective (well, a tiny bit on Canada) and is systemically biased in it's coverage and perception. The article needs to explain the reaction in liberal European and other continents, where most people were rather confused by Americans overreaction.
• The affect on Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake needs expanding. It brings up many issues about race and gender in America. Also, there is some contradiction which needs straightening out. The article says that Jackson's first album after the Superbowl was a critical disappointment, yet it was nominated for 3 Grammys. The article says that the album had good sales, while this is true, they were definitely lower than the album she released before Nibblegate—All For You. All three of her studio albums since the Superbowl have performed progressively worse in terms of sales (irrelevant of critical reception). If you honestly believe "critical reception" is relevant to the affect on career section (I don't see the linkage myself), you should write it in terms of the content of the album reviews. For example, reviews of Damita Jo, largely commented on the Superbowl incident instead of the music. That would be an interesting point to add.
  • I could go on, but there is no need. I suggest this article goes through the GA process and peer review. — Realist² 19:13, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Regarding "worldwide view": Are there any reliable sources that document how "some people" in Europe/elsewhere taunted those oversensitive Americans?
    • Yes there are, I'm not sure about "taunting Americans", unless you've heard about that. I'm talking of the reaction as being..."wtf O.0", confusion etc. It got coverage in the UK for example, journalists tried to explain the cultural divide in the US to UK citizens and characterized it as an overreaction. I'm not sure there was any "anti-American" sentiment in it.
  • Sales of Damita Jo: If it's true, I guess there'd be news reports documenting that it sold lower than All For You. Or we could just present the facts, such as the RIAA certifications of All For You and Damita Jo.
    • I'm sure you can find a reliable source for the worldwide sales of All for You (approximately 7 million) and Damita Jo (approximately 3-4 million). Just present the two sales figures. Certifications could be added, but that's not the best option, since that would be America only presumably.
  • "Issues about race and gender in America"...The section in question quotes an interview of Timberlake in which he asserts that those issues are relevant. --Andrewlp1991 (talk) 21:07, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
    • This still needs expanding though, it's a very important issue. — Realist² 21:18, 15 January 2009 (UTC)