Wikipedia:Peer review/Deep Space Homer/archive1

Deep Space Homer

Deep Space Homer has been through three FA's, with each one getting more positive results. However, there is still significant opposition to promotion. There was a great idea to ping everyone in the recent FA to participate for the PR. Hopefully, we can make the fourth FAN successful. @Cassianto:, @SchroCat:, @Kees08:, @Eric Corbett:, @Laser brain:, @Serial Number 54129:, @Jo-Jo Eumerus:, @Aoba47:, @FunkMonk:, and @Maury Markowitz: Lets do this.

Thank you, AmericanAir88^(talk) 23:28, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

I'll leave my support at the FAC, as last time. FunkMonk (talk) 07:22, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

SC

• Will be back within a few days. - SchroCat (talk) 10:00, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

• I've still not forgotten, and I'm deeply embarrassed to have taken so long to get round to this, but I will be here shortly! Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 22:19, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Finally I have managed to get round to this: my apologies for taking so long.Overall it's in fairly good shape, but there are some rough edges and a couple of bits that just need a little polish here and there. The comments below are rather nit-picky, but that's what's needed for FAC:

Lead

• "In the episode, NASA selects Homer Simpson to participate in a spaceflight to boost low ratings and public interest in space exploration". This doesn't really work for me, partly because "low ratings" is an unexplained concept, and (if you guess it relates to TV ratings), it is a result of the second point. Could be reworded as "In the episode, NASA selects Homer Simpson to participate in a spaceflight to spark public interest in space exploration boost low television ratings of the launches".
• Avoid "However" in most places, but particularly at the beginning of sentences. The sentence can be framed as "Once in space his incompetence destroys the navigation ..."
• "placed on the Simpson family": perhaps "placed on relationships within the Simpson family"?

 Done AmericanAir88^(talk) 17:19, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Plot

• Remove the first "however" and rework "Instead, Homer's boss, Mr. Burns, gives the award to an inanimate carbon rod" (The commas around Burns are better (or at least they are in British English), but as I'm not American, your use may differ, so go with what you want)
• "He prank calls NASA to complain that a broadcast on the Space Shuttle launch is boring" You could rework this to "Finding a broadcast on the Space Shuttle launch to be boring he prank calls NASA to complain."
• "When NASA first approaches": you could use "they" here
• Drop the second "however": "After toasting the mission with a non-alcoholic drink, Barney reverts to alcoholism and leaves via jetpack."
• "receives good ratings: "receives good television ratings"
• I hate "due to" when "because" can be used in its place: "Because of the weightlessness of space, the chips disperse..."
• Final sentence could be reworked (although your call on this, as there is nothing wrong with it as it is): "The carbon rod appears on a Time cover and receives a ticker-tape parade; Aldrin and family celebrate Homer as a hero."

 Done AmericanAir88^(talk) 17:19, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Parodies

• "which was also used in the film": no need for "also"
• "throws a marker": this may be AmEng, but "marker pen" would be better
• "a parody of a similar transition used in 2001: A Space Odyssey including Richard Strauss' tone poem Also sprach Zarathustra". This is a bit garbled: "a parody of a similar transition used in the film; both film and cartoon use Richard Strauss' tone poem Also sprach Zarathustra as backing music".

Done to the end of the Parodies: more to follow. - SchroCat (talk) 12:56, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

 Done AmericanAir88^(talk) 18:58, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Themes

• "The theme of alcoholism in The Simpsons is present": I'm not sold on this opening, which feels a bit forced. ""Deep Space Homer" deals with Barney's alcoholism as he sobers up to become fit and clear-thinking, then regresses to his usual drunken persona after he has a non-alcoholic drink"
• "specifically -> "particularly" (it's not specifically about after Homer's return: it's about before it too.
• "illustrating how easily trends in ratings can be effected by societal change": this is written in Wikipedia's voice, when it shouldn't be. "Homer's space journey increased ratings for NASA; according to the professor of English Paul Cantor, this illustrates how easily trends in ratings can be effected by societal change."

I think this is the lot for now. It's a prose review only, so I've not checked to see if there are other sources that can be used, or checked the veracity of the wheat has been written. Please ping me if you decide to go back to FAC. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 13:34, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

 Done AmericanAir88^(talk) 18:58, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Comments by Kees08

I would support as is, but here are some more sources/information on Aldrin if you feel like adding any of it

• Buzz Aldrin Simpsons action figure
• Explains Race Banyon name

That's the only interesting things I am finding. If you feel they do not warrant inclusion, that's fine, just passing the sources along in case it helps Kees08 (Talk) 04:49, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Unless Jo-Jo Eumerus thinks they will get to it soon, AmericanAir88 could probably close this peer review and nominate the article for FAC if they feel it is ready. Jo-Jo would you be interested in just reviewing at the FAC? Not trying to take over this AA88, just mentioning in case you wanted advice on the process. And no rush to Jo-Jo or any other potential reviewers. Kees08 (Talk) 22:35, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Aye, I think that I'll be commenting on this at the FAC stage, not at peer review. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:06, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

AA Two Month Response

@Cassianto:, @SchroCat:, @Kees08:, @Eric Corbett:, @Laser brain:, @Serial Number 54129:, @Jo-Jo Eumerus:, @Aoba47:, @FunkMonk:, and @Maury Markowitz:: I have finished all of SC's changes and am wondering if anyone else has any thoughts or changes before I run this for a fourth go. AmericanAir88^(talk) 18:58, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Watchlisted this, I might take a look at this in the next few days. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 19:20, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Production

Just one thing: the "Production" section gives Mirkin as the writer, then says that there were "writers". Which is it? Cassianto^Talk 20:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Aside from this, I think this has been hugely improved. Cassianto^Talk

@Cassianto: Clarified. AmericanAir88^(talk) 20:24, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Aoba47

• Is there a citation for the production code in the infobox?

Added along with a new citation AmericanAir88^(talk) 18:00, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

• Would it be beneficial to include the episode's running time in the infobox with a citation? Sitcoms (at least American sitcoms) run for around the same time so it may be unnecessary, but I was wondering it could help someone unfamiliar with the genre or who stumbles on this article while looking through Wikipedia.

Not really. All Simpsons episodes (FA included) do not have a run time posted. Simpsons episodes are tough for this as the cough gag/intro can vary along with scenes.

That is a good point. I do not think there is a standard across all episode articles (as some include the running and others do not) so the article should be fine without it. Aoba47 (talk) 18:40, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

• I am wondering for this part "The episode was well-received, and many critics and fans praised it as one of the best episodes of the series" if "episodes" could be omitted to say "one of the best of the series" since episode/episodes is used three twice (twice in this sentence and once in the next one) in a close context. It really cannot be helped and is not a major issue, but I was curious about this.

Done

• I think this part "attempts to gain the respect of his family" could be condensed down somewhat to "attempts to gain his family's respect"?

Fixed

• For the "Reception" section, could the IGN citation be moved to the end of the sentence? I think it awkwardly cuts off the sentences and gets in the way of readability somewhat.

Done

These are the only points that I have noticed from reading through the article. Everything else seems to have already been ironed out from the above reviewers. I hope my comments are helpful, and good luck with this for the fourth go-about. With all of the activity on here and from the previous FAC, it should hopefully be successful the next time. Aoba47 (talk) 22:39, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

@Aoba47: All changes addressed. AmericanAir88^(talk) 18:00, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. Aoba47 (talk) 18:40, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Well I thought it was fantastic all along, so... But the read-over looks good! Maury Markowitz (talk) 22:20, 24 November 2019 (UTC)