Talk:Dick in a Box: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 20:20, 21 February 2013

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dick in a Box article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Comedy C‑class Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Dick in a Box was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 14, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
May 25, 2009	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

Songs B‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Television B‑class

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Comedy B‑class Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Good Article Nomination

I've looked over this article, and it seems to pass all of the criteria for a good article except on one minor point.

It is well written.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
It is broad in it's coverage.
It adheres to NPOV policies.
It seems to be relatively stable.
It contains images. If this article got one more good, appropriate, legal image, I'd give it a "pass" without hesitation. That's my only sticking point.

Not a huge deal. Lemme know on my talk page if you get it another image. Nswinton 16:18, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree.

Per WP:WIAGA 6(b): a lack of images does not in itself prevent an article from achieving Good Article status, I'm going to go ahead and pass it for GA status; I agree with Nswinton that everything else seems to be well done. I made some minor rearrangements before doing so. Chubbles 05:24, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response

I've heard from countless people who they changed their opinion of Timberlake due to his being able to make fun of his boy-band image by doing Dick in a Box. It's anecdotal, but maybe there's an article out there somewhere to cite. You always hear about the organized complaints after something like this, but there's no real way to quantify increased respect. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by NjtoTX (talk • contribs) 23:34, 22 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Music genre

The video is a parody of R&B sex ballad videos from the early 1990s.
Who, specifically? I can't seem to recall any male duo or group of artists that sang sex-me-up songs like this, though I suppose solo artists like Al B. Sure might qualify. -Rolypolyman 14:15, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA Sweeps (on hold)

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed.

The Lead is not appropriate for the article: the information about concert performances should likely be below in the body, and there's no brief description of what the video is in the lead.
The Response section is too disjointed written in the present style - One or two paragraphs would likely be clearer both in the main section and in the parodies.
Make sure all the parodies/pop culture references are appropriate; and also consider general issues with linking to copyrighted videos on Youtube and other video sites.

I will check back in no less than seven days. If progress is being made and issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far. Regards, MASEM 23:08, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Dick in a Box/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed. In particular the "Response" section is inadequate, with several tags indicating missing citations and dated info.

I will check back in seven days. If these issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far. Lampman (talk) 14:57, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since no significant improvements have been made to the article over the last week, I will now delist it. Lampman (talk) 12:32, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 32: / Line 32: @@
 Not a huge deal.  Lemme know on my talk page if you get it another image.  [[User:Nswinton|Nswinton]] 16:18, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
+I disagree.
 *Per [[WP:WIAGA]] 6(b): ''a lack of images does not in itself prevent an article from achieving Good Article status'', I'm going to go ahead and pass it for GA status; I agree with Nswinton that everything else seems to be well done. I made some minor rearrangements before doing so. [[User:Chubbles1212|Chubbles]] 05:24, 14 April 2007 (UTC)