Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Katie Joplin/archive1
- 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 promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 24 June 2021 [1].
- Nominator(s): Aoba47 (talk) 19:24, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
This article is about a 1999 WB sitcom which starred Park Overall as a host of a phone-in radio program. It was optioned as a potential mid-season replacement for the 1998–1999 television season, but was delayed for a year. The WB had already decided to cancel the series prior to its premiere and seemingly did little to no promotion for it. This show is so obscure that it did not have a Wikipedia article until 2018, and I would be surprised if anyone has heard of it before this nomination.
I worked on this article back in 2018, and I was inspired to expand it further for this FAC. I am looking forward to hearing everyone's feedback. I will do my best to further improve the article and address all the suggestions. Thank you in advance! Aoba47 (talk) 19:24, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
Comments from SNUGGUMS
[edit]Resolved
|
---|
For a short-lived series that many are unaware of, you mostly seem to have covered all the essential aspects. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 16:02, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
|
Looks good, so I now support this nomination, and the media review passes as well. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 23:57, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 23:58, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- @SNUGGUMS: Apologies for the ping. I just wanted to let you know that I added an image of Jay Thomas per a request from a below review. I wanted to update you since you did the media review and you had also requested an image be added to the article. I think it does look better with an image so I was likely over-thinking with my hesitancy about it before. Aoba47 (talk) 19:52, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
- Not a problem, and File:Jay Thomas at 44th Primetime Emmy Awards cropped.jpg is perfectly fine to use. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 19:56, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 20:01, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Comments from ChrisTheDude
[edit]- "the series portrays Katie characterizes Katie" - think there's a stray word or two in there
- Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- "Katie's radio show received a city-wide promotional campaign" - shouldn't that be in the present tense like the rest of the synopses?
- Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- Think that's all I got - great work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:22, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Thank you for your review. Those were some silly mistakes on my part. If there is anything else I can do to improve the article, please let me know. I hope you have a great week! Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:14, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 15:48, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Comments from Tintor2
[edit]Resolved
|
---|
Only these three confused me. I'll do a source review if you want another day.Tintor2 (talk) 20:23, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
|
Supporting nomination. The only nitpick I might throw is that "Rob Owen believed the series would appeal to fans of Overall" Does he specify that the actor is quite popular within a certain demography? Kinda like how the character Takayuki Yagami you once read was given the facial expressions and Japanese voice of the celebrity Takuya Kimura to make his video game more popular within fans.Tintor2 (talk) 21:42, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you for your support. That is a good question. The part about this from the source is the following,
If you're a fan of actress Park Overall (Empty Nest) tune to the WB's summer sitcom Katie Joplin
, and I have added a part about her association with the Empty Nest sitcom. Aoba47 (talk) 22:45, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you for your support. That is a good question. The part about this from the source is the following,
Source review – Pass
[edit]Will do tomorrow. Aza24 (talk) 09:26, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you. Take as much time as you need. Aoba47 (talk) 20:34, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
- Version reviewed [2]
- Formatting
- Though I can't access ref 4 (see below) I assume it needs a subscription marker like the other Los Angeles Daily News refs
- I have replaced the citation with one from ProQuest and added the appropriate formatting. Aoba47 (talk) 17:18, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- Retrieval dates are a bit inconsistent. If I understand it correctly—it seems like you're not having them for archived pages, which is fine, but there's some inconsistency otherwise, Newspapers.com for example has retrieval dates for some but not others.
- Thank you for catching this. Apologies for my sloppy work. I have archived the web sources, but not the newspaper or ProQuest sources. I believe it should be consistent now, but please let me know if there is anything I have overlooked. Aoba47 (talk) 17:18, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- ref 12 should be via Newspapers.com, right?
- Added. Aoba47 (talk) 17:18, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- wrong first name for ref 16 I think :)
- I apparently just loved that guy's last name that much lol. Aoba47 (talk) 17:18, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- ref 25 should probably have via Newspapers.com
- Added. Aoba47 (talk) 17:18, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- Burnett doesn't seemed to be used
- Removed. It was used to cite that a recurring character, but since the show aired for only five episodes, it is a little silly to say someone is recurring when they never had the chance to do so in the first place. Aoba47 (talk) 17:18, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- Reliability
- Given the subject matter, seems fine in general
- Thank you for checking this. Aoba47 (talk) 17:18, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- Verifiability
- Link for ref 4 is broken for me
- Replaced with a different link. Aoba47 (talk) 17:24, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- Hmm Irvin really needs page numbers, or a page range if that's more convenient. If there's no page numbers (which is my guess for why you don't have them already) add a chapter or section title if possible, with |loc= instead of |p=
- Thank you for the suggestion. You are correct that it does not have page numbers (at least for the digital version and I have checked a few different places to confirm this). I have added the chapter title to better help readers who want to find this information in that source. Aoba47 (talk) 17:24, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- that's it for a fist pass—I'll take another look whenever you have a chance to respond Aza24 (talk) 08:36, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Aza24: Thank you for your review. Apologies for my very silly mistakes with the sourcing on this one. I hope you are having a great end to your week and an even better start to your weekend! Aoba47 (talk) 17:24, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for your attentiveness. Looking great now—pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 05:14, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you again for your review and I greatly appreciate that you added the access-dates for the ProQuest sources. I am not sure why I missed those. Apologies for that. I hope you are doing well and staying safe! Aoba47 (talk) 05:55, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Comments from Heartfox
[edit]- "It is about Katie Joplin (Park Overall) who moves from Knoxville to Philadelphia" → I think something should describe who Katie Joplin is, like "It is about a single mother, Katie Joplin, ...". Right now it feels like the reader should already know who she is.
- Good point. I have decided to just revise this paragraph as a whole to hopefully make this clearer, but please let me know if further work is necessary. Aoba47 (talk) 21:13, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- Oh sorry, I meant the lead not the section. Heartfox (talk) 22:00, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- No need to apologies. I misread your comment so that was my mistake. I have revised this. Thank you again! Aoba47 (talk) 22:10, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- I believe it should be written "The WB", not "the WB"; "The" is a part of its name.
- Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 21:13, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- "original program WB" → "original program The WB"
- Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 21:13, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- "was the subject" → "was a subject" (not the only one)
- Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 21:13, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- "the series characterizes her through her fashion" → what does this mean?
- The show (at least according to the sources I have found) presents Liz as a far more fashionable person than Katie. I have revised this part with a quote from the source. This was something from an earlier draft of the article before I found the source about her career as a fashion magazine editor so that may already cover this and if necessary, I can just remove this part altogether. Aoba47 (talk) 21:13, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- author-link=Marilyn Beck
- Thank you! For some reason, I missed this one. Aoba47 (talk) 21:13, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- fn 9 url-status=dead. Suggest formatting it as Template:Cite press release, not web.
- Thank you for catching this. I have marked the url as dead and I have used the press release template. I always forget about it so I will be better about using it in the future. Aoba47 (talk) 21:13, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- link "1998–1999 television season" in the lead and body
- Linked. Aoba47 (talk) 21:13, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- Advertising Age url-access=subscription
- Added. Aoba47 (talk) 21:13, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- location of Statesman Journal?
- I am uncertain about adding this because I do not specify location in any of the other citations so I am not sure if it would work if only citation has this. Plus, there is an article for the Statesman Journal, which specifies the location (i.e. Salem, Oregon). Aoba47 (talk) 21:13, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
Heartfox (talk) 20:20, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Heartfox: Thank you for your review. Apologies for all the silly mistakes that I had made in the article. You have helped to improve the article immensely and if there is anything else that can be improved, please let me know and I will get to it. Have a great weekend! Aoba47 (talk) 21:13, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- Happy to Support. Have a nice weekend, Heartfox (talk) 00:04, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 01:05, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
Support from 100cellsman
[edit]This is a short but sweet article about an unsuccessful television show. 😃 웃OO 00:56, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 01:05, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
Comments Support from Spy-cicle
[edit]Resolved
|
---|
Not an expert on writing TV articles but here are some comments, mostly on prose.
|
That's is pretty well all I could think of, hope these comments help. Regards Spy-cicle💥 Talk? 12:56, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Spy-cicle: Thank you for your review. It helps a lot. Your copy-edits to the article have helped to improve a great deal as well. I have addressed all your comments (either through revisions or responses). Please let me know if there is anything else I can do to improve the article. I hope you have a great rest of your weekend! Aoba47 (talk) 17:04, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Aoba47: Thank you for the speed response, I have replied above. The only outstanding query I have is regarding the images. Spy-cicle💥 Talk? 14:02, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you again for the help. I have addressed that point. Have a great week! Aoba47 (talk) 17:46, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
- Great thank you once again for the fast response. Support. Regards Spy-cicle💥 Talk? 18:31, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Status update
[edit]- @FAC coordinators: Apologies for the ping. I was wondering if I could get a status report on this FAC. It has received a good amount of support as well as source and image reviews. I am only asking as it was recently pushed down into the "Older nominations" list. Thank you and I hope everyone is staying safe and have a good week so far. Aoba47 (talk) 03:23, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Support from Kailash
[edit]- Support: The prose meets my expectations. There were only ref formatting issues, but I took care of it with ProveIt. --Kailash29792 (talk) 06:20, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 12:59, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Support from PMC
[edit]Hi Aoba! Just a few prose comments. Generally this looks really well-researched and well-written.
Brooks and Marsh wrote that the series portrays Katie through her "perception, Southern wit, and strong opinions"
: I'm not sure it's grammatical to say that someone is portrayed "through" her characteristics. Maybe "with", like "Brooks and Marsh wrote that the series portrays Katie with..."?
- Good point. I have revised this part with "with". Aoba47 (talk) 16:33, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
and they believed these qualities are why she is hired to host a phone-in radio program
: This feels like it's worded from an in-universe perspective. The show calls for Katie to be a talk-show host, so she is one. Maybe reword to say that it worked for her character to be a radio host.
- I have copy-edited this part, but please let me know if it requires further work. Aoba47 (talk) 16:33, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- The third paragraph under "Premise" focuses on Glen and Sara, but then the last sentences talk about Katie's storylines and Head's feelings about his character. Those should be moved.
- I have copy-edited this part, but let me know if further revision is necessary. Aoba47 (talk) 16:37, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- In the Reception section I notice there's no commentary on why the show failed so badly. Is that information available? It seems like it would be pertinent. The closest we get is the Radio World review where he talks about how unrealistic the premise is, but even that doesn't really tell us why the show wasn't good from a general perspective.
- I have provided some additional context. These articles do not go into further depth on why this particular show was not good since it is a minor part of their larger discussions. I have tried to add some context about that, like Mediaweek being about network's rising interest in summer programming, USA Today's review of The WB and UPN's first five years, and Radio World's questions on why radio-based television shows have not found greater success. Please let me know if further revision would be helpful. I was just worried that it would be too tangential if that makes sense. Aoba47 (talk) 17:12, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Otherwise this is one of those cool niche articles that make Wikipedia so delightfully odd, and I'll be happy to support. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 15:15, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Premeditated Chaos: Thank you for the review. You have helped to improve the article. I believe that I have addressed everything, but please let me know if further revisions would be beneficial. I love working on obscure topics like this one, but I do also understand the importance of working on broader and more well-known topics as well. I hope you are doing well and staying safe! Aoba47 (talk) 17:13, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Aoba, it all looks good to me. I'm happy to support your hard work here :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:35, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 20:36, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:52, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.