User talk:Srfanone

For previous talk, see User talk:SRfan07

Re:Aquaman

I'd advise against the plot expansion. Plots are generally there just to add a little context to what the article is primarily focused on. The entire article needs expanding, but that always takes time. We need to expand the production section, and rearrange the order of things. I think I'm thinking the "cast and characters" need bit of restructuring. Maybe having the list of characters as such

Justin Hartley as Arthur Curry: is a _______________________, _______________. Justin ___________

This way we have all the cast in an easily viewable format (no tables) and we can give a brief description of the character (with sources to base the characterization) and then follow up with any information that primarily focuses on Justin in that role, like maybe personal praise for his performance. The latter part isn't necessary, but usually Featured articles will have a cast section where they are in a list-like format. I think the the casting info can be moved up to the Production section, with the cast list just below as illustration of the final outcome. BTW, great job on the additional info you've found. Also, I think the "release and future" section needs to be broken into two separate sections of "Reaction" (or "Reception", that's a preferenced terminology) and "Release"; both need to be expanded. Then we have info on the release on the pilot, potential pick up, and maybe even info on possible DVD releases if they decide to do that. The Reaction section will be kind of obvious, it will be about critical reaction to the pilot. Bignole 13:15, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We got a ways to go. There is a size requirement for GA status (the first step in getting to FA) and we haven't reached it yet. We have a lot of expanding to do. Bignole 14:23, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you could, find some sources for the powers (they can be comic book sources for "stand Aquaman powers", but also if the producers talk about his powers). Comparison??? Eh, I don't know. The show doesn't claim to be "Aquaman" in anything other than title; meaning that it doesn't try to be the comic. Actually, it clearly states that it is not the comic, and I think simply saying that this is about AC before he is Aquaman is good. Since he isn't "Aquaman" you cannot really compare the two. Also, Wiki doesn't really care about "canon", because it doesn't have to do with the production of the show. Bignole 14:39, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think since it's so "lone" we could probably staple it on to the end of Justin/AC cast info. Bignole 15:12, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I wish I could help more with the expansion, but I'm at work right now and a lot of sites are restricted to me. Bignole 15:24, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As soon as we get it to the size requirement, I'll go ahead and nominate it for a peer review. This way we can have an outsider come in and let us know what needs some sprucing. Then we can go to GA nomination, more peer reviews, and then FA nominations (if we can get it there, some articles will never be able to get there because of lack of information). Bignole 15:32, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The first stop will be to Wikipedia:Requests for feedback, because the article isn't developed enough for Wikipedia:Peer review. But, I don't want to request feedback till we are done filling in the article. Wouldn't want them to make suggestions while we are still adding lots of info. Bignole 16:04, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm..not sure. I'll go ahead and post it for feedback request, then after they are done with their suggestions we can revamp and go from there. Bignole 13:59, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can view the request Here. I suggest saving it to your watchlist so that you can see if they respond. Bignole 14:31, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, if you want to "upload a newer version" you can do that. Just make sure you resize it before hand. One of the things you have to do in the "rationale" is have a low resolution image. I've seen the House page, and I don't know how it actually became a featured article. Let's get some more information and then we'll submit for GA status. Peer review is before FA, and since no one wants to read the article on the "Feedback" page, we'll just have to go to the GA qualification people. Bignole 12:58, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I saw let's get atleast one or two more reviews (if we can) and then submit it. They should tell us what to expand (if anything). Bignole 13:29, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We don't want to flood the page with images. At the moment, we probably only need maybe two more images (behind the scenes, and one of those screencaptures). Bignole 14:08, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I like this one Bignole 14:23, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The plot section is fine, just make it like a 200px size. The plot, cast, and powers section are so small that placing it anywhere is fine, I just figure the plot is the more standard place. Bignole 14:40, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you want me to add it or are you going to? Bignole 14:52, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They finally left a little feedback. Nothing too specific. Basically do some fine tuning, get some images. Bignole 21:33, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Amber McDonald for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Amber McDonald is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amber McDonald until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 20:06, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]