Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/South Park (season 1)/archive3

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 not promoted by User:Ian Rose 19:04, 25 August 2013 [1].

South Park (season 1)[edit]

Nominator(s): Nergaal (talk) 09:03, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article because I think I brought it to wp:FA? standards. Nergaal (talk) 09:03, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lead—prose observations:

  • I think "as well" could be removed. And "of the show".
  • "... which led to talks for a series. The series ..." – before the period needs rewording. The rep either side of the period would be nice to get rid of, somehow.
  • "quickly" is OK, but consider "soon". They weren't filmed hurriedly, I'm presuming. "and due to its success" might be more logical that "but due ..."?
  • "Fall", for me, is March–May.
  • "Critics gave the season mixed reviews, from rating it so offensive that ..." – it's ok, but tighter would be preferable. "Critics gave the season mixed reviews: on the negative side, some critiques rated it so offensive that ...; on the positive side ...". But you can probably do it better than this.
  • Opening sentence for Ep. 1 is not grammatical. Possibly: "Cartman dreams about being abducted by aliens and relates these dreams to his friends Stan, Kyle and Kenny."

Needs some prose auditing. Tony (talk) 11:05, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed these and went ahead with another prose-check for the entire article. I hope things look ok now. Isn't "produce quickly" correct? Nergaal (talk) 19:17, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't "soon" less ambiguous? "Quickly" can refer to the speed of the action, rather than when it occurs. Or maybe the source did mean they hurry-scurried to get it done. Tony (talk) 14:37, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
These guys these days generally produce an episode the week before it airs. So I am assuming that back then they might have done something similar. They produced them soon after, but also took little time to produce them. There is less than a month an a half between the episode in discussion aired, and the earliest time they could have been asked to write it. In summary, I don't mind changing it to soon but I have a feeling that quickly might actually be more accurate in this particular case. Nergaal (talk) 19:10, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Did I miss anything? Nergaal (talk) 19:28, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note to reviewers this article has gone through one FLC, two FACs, and three PRs already. I would really appreciate if people were to give some feedback so this does not become a perpetual FAC........ Nergaal (talk) 19:29, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
initially ran for 13 episodes on the US network Comedy Central, from August 13, 1997 to February 25, 1998 - "initially" redundant here I think.
:Nevertheless, - something went missing here at the end of the lead?
a talking feces - I'd use the word "feces" as a collective noun, much like "dirt" - so putting "a" infront of it sounds weird...
I think I removed any possible issue by using the unambiguous non-plural "stool". Nergaal (talk) 05:26, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
who were unable to receive Comedy Central due to its unavailability at the time - umm, I think I'd delete everything after "Comedy Central".
Hal Boedeker of the Orlando Sentinel believed that the episode made "such a bad impression that it's hard to get on the show's strange wavelength." - he "wrote" or "opined" but not "believed"....?
with helping elevate the series during the early part of the season. - "elevate" is a funny verb here. Do you mean lift viewer ratings?
raised South Park to a new level of popularity and relevance - I'd cut the "and relevance" as puffery - it needs to be relevant to something.
In 2008, scholar Stephen Groening argumented "argumented"?
  • I went through each of these and tried to fix them. Let me know if the new phrasing works well. Thanks for the comments and edits! Nergaal (talk) 00:17, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Better - need to think about "piece of feces" and also read again. More later. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:13, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
FYI: originally it was "a talking poo" but I thought that poo was not professional enough. Nergaal (talk) 01:21, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes this is tricky - "stool" is ok. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:55, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As well as every episode from the season, the DVD releases featured bonus material... - I think bolded bit is possibly redundant - sentence has three "episode"s in it.
Removed it and the second "episode" usage. Nergaal (talk) 05:24, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
link flatulence and dildo.
linked

Right, where I am sitting now is that if this were promoted I personally would not have a problem, but it is probably conditional on what other people have found. I am not seeing any prose-clangers left and am content reading it without an itchy edit-finger, so consider this a provisional support pending resolution of other reviewers' concerns. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:46, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I stumbled here from my FAC and had to comment, having watched (and preferred) the oldest SP episodes. That being said...

  • " for 13 episodes on the US network" - this should say "United States", and I feel it should link to television station or something.
    • I changed it but now "United States" shounds cluncky
  • "receiving writing credit for some episodes." - "some" is a weasel word. Why not exact number?
    • fixed
  • "and their bizarre experiences in the titular mountain town" - as much as I agree, I feel like "bizarre" is a bit POV, unless that's meant to be a quote from someone.
    • switched to unusual. there is a critic somewhere describing it that way but I can't seem to find it now
  • "while the aliens communicate with cow and consider them" - cow plural?
    • fix
  • "A big event is planned for the arrival of Kathie Lee Gifford to South Park, who comes to present an award to Eric Cartman." - The "big event" bit is vague. The whole sentence could be more compact, such as - "South Park plans an event for Kathie Lee Gifford, who comes to present an award..." or something. BTW, you call him Eric Cartman here, but elsewhere you call him just Cartman. Why the inconsistency?
    • rephrased. I hope it sounds good now.
      • Still inconsistent as to what you call Eric Cartman. And there is no indication why Cartman has any importance in the episode. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:21, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • I went ahead and completely rewrote the blurbs for most episodes. They should be significantly better now. Nergaal (talk) 02:29, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • Better, but still some issues.
            • "that this did actually happened when Kyle's baby brother Ike is abducted also" - could be cleaner.
            • "Meanwhile the boy's teacher" - add comma (and it reads hilarious seeing "the boy's teacher, Mr. Garrison, attempts to assassinate Gifford" in a Wikipedia article!)
            • " gay dog runs away and finds the town's most flamboyant, gayest man, Big Gay Al" - ehh, that's kinda POV
            • "South Park Cows" - since it's a team, shouldn't it start with "The South Park Cows"?
            • "lose a football game against a rival team as Jimbo and Ned fail to sabotage the game. " - find a way not to say "game" twice. Also, this is a bit untrue. They don't want to sabotage the game. They just want to beat the spread. Maybe something like "Jimbo and Ned plant explosives on a goat mascot to ensure they beat the spread of a grade school football game"?
            • "The citizens who get bitten become zombies but instead are diagnosed with pinkeye. " - why the "instead"?
            • "A starving Ethopian child is accidentally sent to South Park. Cartman is sent back to Ethiopia instead, while mutant turkeys assault the town. " - again, the "instead" jumps a bit of logic. And you should could afford to say the Ethopian child is referred as Starvin' Marvin by... Cartman, right?
            • "Kyle's mom protests the school's Christmas play leading to the removal all religious aspects of Christmas from the entire town. " - avoid the nominalization if you can, and add a comma after "play".
          • Like I said, it's much better than before. Those were my main concerns. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 04:10, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Meanwhile, geologist and Stan's father Randy Marsh discovers that the mountain is a volcano that is about to erupt and convinces the townsfolk to dig a trench for diverting the lava. " - bit of a run-on. As a general point, many of the summaries are borderline run-ons and not the best written. If I had to guess, the focus on the article for FAC was elsewhere in the article?
    • I honestly tried to have summaries as compact as possible - probably that's why there are run-on sentences. I would appreciate any further specific help with this.
      • Most summaries are on the weak side and could use some outside copyediting. They're all either poorly written, run-ons, or make little sense, with little flow. None of the episode summaries appear up to the level of featured article candidacy. Sorry, but this stands as my biggest issue. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:21, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • " George Clooney reportedly made 300 copies for his friends, the short subsequently regarded as likely the first viral video." - weird sentence structure.
    • changed it
      • I'd say "reported to have made", but better. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:21, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • switched
  • I was initially glad you included this quote in the lede - "is so offensive that it shouldn't have been made. It doesn't just push the envelope; it knocks it off the table." - but when I saw it was the Parents Television Council, I was annoyed you omitted who said that. The PTC hates everything
    • I added PTC to the lead
  • "The impact the show would have ended up surprising everybody involved with the show." - redundant
    • fixed
      • "The impact the show would have ended up surprising everybody involved with it" - still poorly written. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:21, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • redone
  • "The first DVD releases came later that year" - this contradicts the rest of the article. I'm surprised a DVD of the show was available in 1998, but the article says 2002... I'm confused here.
    • The first episodes came out on DVD in 1998, but what is the norm these days, a "season DVD" came out only in 2002. How do you think I should rephrase it? Nergaal (talk) 23:27, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All in all, the article is decent, but there are some issues. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 04:31, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • I notice there is a bit that is hidden. Any reason aside from that it's unsourced? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:21, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • In 2010, TV Guide published a list of TV's greatest seasons, in which Season 1 was ranked thirteenth, being South Park's only season on the list.[citation needed] Also, South Park was ranked the fifth greatest animated program of all time by the same magazine.
As I've said below, this part was added before I started working on the article, and seems to be a nice thing to add. However, I was unable to dig a source for this. Nergaal (talk) 02:29, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I plan to run through later today, but it looks to me like there are a lot of details that could use improvement even at a glance. Hopefully that means the article has been polished enough that there's only little things to fix now. ceranthor 04:37, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delegate comment -- Ceranthor, given the length of time this nom's been open I'd normally be archiving it now but if your review is imminent I can leave it open a bit longer, though the likelihood of consensus to promote being arrived at soon seems a bit slim at this stage. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:39, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • I would really appreciate any opposes that don't have non-descript reasonings like "needs prose improvement". Nergaal (talk) 17:48, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Ceranthor
Lead
  • which led to talks for a series. - With comedy central? With who?
clarified
  • The first season was a ratings success for Comedy Central. - This sentence doesn't read well; I suspect it's the rating success that's driving me crazy.
I genuinely don't know how to rephrase this. Don't people use i.e. "box office success for Paramount"? Nergaal (talk) 05:12, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Episodes
  • insurgents and shot into the Sun - You should really clarify this. I have no idea what this means. :)
"shot her" from an edit I made just hours ago
Development
  • I'm not putting poo on my network." Parker - citation?
citation was at the end of the next sentence but doubled it since it is a quote. Nergaal (talk) 05:12, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • considered it to be "literally the funniest thing I'd ever seen," - The quote should match the rest of the sentence. I think an annotated [he'd] should replace the I'd. Not really a dealbreaker.
changed
  • one thing we have to know before we really go any further: how do you feel about talking poo?" - Citation?
same as before
  • There were three holiday episodes ("Pinkeye", "Starvin' Marvin" and "Mr. Hankey, the Christmas Poo") - I think an endash would fit better than parentheses.
you mean m-dashes? I still have no idea when dashes are preferred to parantheses. Nergaal (talk) 05:12, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Reception
  • South Park's first season was a ratings success - This again.
open to suggestions?
  • I note this comment. '< how about #11 and #13? or #2, #4, #5>' - Is this resolved or not?
This was a self-note I left a loong time ago. After looking REALLLY hard I found for 11 and 13, but they were the viewer # not ratings, and I am not too comftable enough to convert that into ratings. as for 2, 4, and 5, I couldn't find somebody with access to appropriate sources from that long time ago. Nergaal (talk) 05:12, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The impact the show would have ended up surprising everybody involved with it. - Sounds like a slight vio of NPOV to me.
I genuinely remember this being in one of the refs, but I cannot seem to be able to dig it now. grrrr. Nergaal (talk) 05:12, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Anything being done about this? In 2010, TV Guide published a list of TV's greatest seasons, in which Season 1 was ranked thirteenth, being South Park's only season on the list. Also, South Park was ranked the fifth greatest animated program of all time by the same magazine. - No citation. It's still hidden in the article after almost three years.
Yeah, I looked for this online and either it was added initially by an over-zealous fan, ot it was in some printed version which google's crawled doesn't seem to find it. I've left it hidden in case somebody can actually dig it, because it would be nice to say it. Nergaal (talk) 05:12, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Media release
  • Six episodes - again, I think an endash would suffice.
Are you actually sure it is not m-dash? Nergaal (talk) 05:12, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • As well as every episode from the season, the DVD releases featured bonus material - Bit awkward structure
rephrased
  • and another one - another clip? not all that clear.
clarified
  • first season ("Volcano", "An - endash again

The hidden info in this section - what's up with that?

Somebody added this, but I genuinely think it too much out of the subject matter to make it an actual footnote. I am almost 100% sure that technically all the episodes before 2008 were made available online when the site was started, but after the Mohamed comics controversies a few years ago, the episodes depicting the guy were removed (permanently?). Check this out for clarification. I can just go ahead and remove the comment altogether. Nergaal (talk) 05:12, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
removed
General/Things to Take Away
  • I fixed a lot of serial comma inconsistencies. Either use it, or don't. I don't care either way.
I genuinely can't figure out what you are talking about. I might be a bit tired though... Nergaal (talk) 05:20, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Don't ever use "went on to verb". It's always redundant. always!
So just replace it with "verb"? Nergaal (talk) 05:12, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My goal is to take care of pretty much everything I can so that you can renominate this and have it pass with flying colors. After running through, I still don't think the prose is fully there yet, but I'm totally willing to help you out on the side. ceranthor 04:08, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A side-question. I think you added the dash in "crudely-made". I thought that adverbs (xyzly) are never linked with a dash to the verb. Was I just misinformed? Nergaal (talk) 05:20, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You are correct; it is quite rare to link adverbs with verbs being used as adjectives or with anything really. I have removed the hyphen.
And just fyi, when I mention the serial comma inconsistency, I meant that sometimes you were using one, two, and three versus one, two and three. Neither is more correct than the other, it's just that you need to stay consistent throughout the article. ceranthor 14:35, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I went back and did another round of CEing. Let me know if you think the article is up to par now. Nergaal (talk) 02:29, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nominator asked me to return. I've made a few trivial changes to the lead. There's one possible typo (I left an inline comment). Concerned to find this sentence in the description of the first ep: "The boys realize that this did actually happened when Kyle's baby brother Ike is abducted also." Two grammatical issues there. Plus ... I'm out of touch with this genre of WP article; would it be useful to readers, and add value to the article, to mention that alien probes are a send-up of a cultural phenomenon? That's one reason it was so humorous (and provocative). Am I picking up that there's very critical social commentary in a lot of these episode themes? The second ep, for example, takes on US obesity, and might be related to the intransigence of the advertising regulators? (I don't know, but you might.) The gay dog ... sounds hilarious, but maybe there's a serious commentary going on there? I don't mean to dominate the article with highly intellectualised sociology; but just a brief phrase or sentence in a few of the more obvious episode summaries might be good. I do think the lead might bring it out. The lead finishes with: "Parents Television Council rated it so offensive that it "shouldn't have been made": "it doesn't just push the envelope; it knocks it off the table",[3] while another critic thought of it as "coming pretty damn close" to being a "perfect" television series season.[4]" Calls into question why these opinions were so diverse. I guess because some critics (and viewers) were prepared for the implicit self-criticism of American society, while others were not. You may have a better way of putting it. Perhaps go back to a couple of contrasting crits?

    There are more prose glitches, too, just picking at random: "Stan's Grandpa Marsh attempts suicide and tries to enlist the boy's help."—is that plural "boys' "? "Kyle's mother organizes a boycott against the boys' favorite television series Terrence and Phillip in protest of its toilet humor."—that's self-referential, and sounds like a clever response to the crits (in protest at). I presume "a talking, singing feces" should be "a talking, singing fecal stool"? "Kyle's mom protests the school's Christmas play leading to the removal all religious aspects of Christmas from the entire town."—wasn't there a court case in a local town around this time, about just such a thing?

    "George Clooney was reported to havE made 300 copies"—what's going on there?

    Can you enlist a few fresh eyes, preferably of editors of similar articles? Tony (talk) 14:42, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In depth comments from Ceranthor
Lead
  • Several episodes received award nominations, including for a 1998 Emmy Award i - including for?
  • The creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone wrote most of the season's episodes; Dan Sterling, Philip Stark and David Goodman were credited with writing five episodes - Did parker and stone also get credit for those episodes? It's unclear.
  • I fixed what must have been a typo.
  • and was nominated for a 1998 Annie Award in the "Outstanding Achievement in an Animated Primetime or Late Night Television Program". - Just in, no the.
Episodes
  • The boys realize that this did actually happened when Kyle's baby brother Ike is abducted also. - Grammar. Also a wordy ending.
  • They manage to rescue Ike while the aliens conclude that cows are the most intelligent species on the planet. - Instead of planet, just use Earth.
  • The town prepares for an event involving Kathie Lee Gifford presenting an award to Cartman - Involving makes the sentence awfully wordy. Also, I think you should be slightly more specific about the reason for the award.
  • He tries to lose weight but instead, becomes even more obese from lack of workout. - The article for the episode's summary suggests that he only tries to gain muscle. Maybe better if you say he tries to get into good shape.
  • The citizens who get bitten become zombies, but instead, are diagnosed with pinkeye. - Why but, instead? I don't think this sentence makes much sense as is.
  • Cartman is sent back to Ethiopia instead, while mutant turkeys assault the town. - Assault which town? (I've seen the episode, but it needs to be clear.)
  • Kyle's mom protests the school's Christmas play leading to the removal all religious aspects of Christmas from the entire town. - Removal of all
Development
  • the short resembled the style of the later series more closely.[17] - Later series means south Park? I think this needs a ce.
  • and the short was subsequently regarded as likely the first viral video.[2] - What does this mean? I know what a viral video is of course, but this sentence is very hard to understand properly. How can it be regarded as the first viral video? Surely there must be one that was first?
Reception
  • The season finale, "Cartman's Mom is a Dirty Slut", received a Nielsen rating in the 8.0 range[30] and gained over 300,000 viewers when first aired in Canada in August 1998.[31][32] - What does 8.0 indicate? It gained those viewers only in Canada? I think if that's what you're trying to say, there's a better word than gained to use.
  • due to the characters frequent use of profanities.[36] - characters'
  • Devin Leonard of Fortune regarded - He 'regarded'? No. Better word, please. :)
  • low distribution of just 21 million subscribers.[18] - Regular subscribers?

ceranthor 14:56, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delegate comment (2) -- I'm afraid we don't seem to be any closer to consensus to promote than when last I visited, and there are still comments to be addressed, so I'll be archiving this long-running nom shortly. Please address the remaining points outside of FAC and feel free to nominate after the usual two-week waiting period. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:52, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/South_Park_(season_1)/archive3&oldid=1086353061"