Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Avatar: The Last Airbender

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

[edit] Avatar: The Last Airbender

Please consider this article as it just lost in the last nomination and I think it has improved enough to be a feature article. jeremybelpois 18:30, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Weak support even though 1d From Overview->Premise "fantastic animals" (Fantastic? Looks POV to me). --SonicChao talk 18:55, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment There are few deficiencies. Though there is some POV, a lot of the seemingly opinion is realy the intended opinion set by the creators of the show. This means that through logical deduction the powers or abilities the animals contain (in your example) are made to amaze the show's audience.
  • Striked as per Fyre2387. --SonicChao talk 00:14, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment The website references should use {{cite web}}, and more inline citations are needed, some sections don't have any. The images need fair use rationales. Jay32183 20:12, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Striked as per Parent5446. Problem addressed and completely resolved. (note, only the striked out part.)
  • Comment The {{cite web}} template makes the article too messy as it puts a title, language, etc. about the source. However, I do agree that more citations are needed.
  • At the very least the url, title, and accessdate fields would need values. The more complete the source information the better. Sources aren't there to make the article pretty, they're there to make it verifiable. Jay32183 20:49, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment OK, I filled in all I could do by using the {{cite web}} template on all non-inline citations. You an check it out. jeremybelpois 21:33, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
  • I converted the first inline citation, can you handle the rest of those on your own? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jay32183 (talk • contribs).
  • OK. I figured out how to do it now. I'll change them as fast as possible. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Parent5446 (talk • contribs).
  • Please don't strike other people comments, report that it's done and I'll strike it myself. Actually, you missed numbers 2 and 3 of the inline citations. Jay32183 20:07, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Support I support this article due to that I feel it is superior and it is well-written, unlike what it was four months ago. The only flaws are that there is not a list of the episodes on the page (since there is a seperate article for the epsiodes) and that there are only 19 inline citations. That is not much of a deficiency.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Parent5446 (talk • contribs) 16:36, 2 December 2006 (UTC).
  • No Vote Due to my extensive editing of all Avatar: The Last Airbender related articles, I refrain from voting on the subject of Bias. I hope that my other editors do the same. H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 03:55, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Support The article itself is definitely good enough to be featured, but I'm not quite sure about the links. The character bios linked to this page are mostly biased and some do not have their fiction made clear.Stretchyrubberbands( Tell me how to overcome my stupidity) 07:50, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Support per Stretchyrubberbands. --Twlighter 19:00, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Support as an editor of the aricle, I belive that this article has improved vastly from last time. (Actually I can't edit the article because McAffee stops the page from coming up completley, but thats another story) Cnriaczoy42 01:48, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Object Missing a lot of key information. No Production information, no critcal reaction, except for some rewards, no information on it sucess or how popular it is. The subsections in Influence are short, stubby and uneeded. They can easily be one or two sections. Media Information section just lists whats in another article instead of summarizing it in prose (with facts). There is also a citation needed tag. See also section shouldn't have links that are already in the article. All images need fair use rationale. Sokka image has incorrect copyright info. Medvedenko 03:01, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment There does not have to be information on how poplar it is, it is just an article on what the show is about. In addition, there may not be a lot of rsources for some information such as influence and production information. If you can come and find enough resources to write one or two sections of influence, then tell me and you can prove me wrong. Otherwise, a lot of your objection may not be possible to complete. Besides, the purpoose of the article is to draw people in and inform them about the show, not tell them about idols from a religion that influenced the show. The only reason anyone would put that would be for people really researching Avatar: The Last Airbender or to just make the article longer (which is not the point as a literary piece, including an article, only ha to be as long as it takes to make a point, which the article has clearly done).
The article is NOT on what the show is about its about the show. No where in the body of the article (not the intro which only sumarizes what is in the article) does it say when the show aired, how it came about, who created it, where it was animated. All that information may not be available, but some of it is and it must be in there. Same goes for popularity and critical reaction. The article's focus should be on facts outside the show's story. If there is no reference on an Influence than it can't be in the article because that would original research. I said nothing about going into detail about the influences, I just wanted you to merge the subsections in influneces. Every Influence doesn't need its own section when they are only one or two sentences. Medvedenko 03:27, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
The comment about "how popular" the show is refers not to what fanboys are saying but to the opinions of notable television critics and ratings inforamtion to show how large the audience is. I agree that that type of information should be included in all articles about television shows. Jay32183 03:30, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Wait, I'm confused, why doesn't this work again?
  • Originally slated to start November of 2004, Avatar: The Last Airbender debuted on TV February 21, 2005 and is available on DVD or for download at the iTunes Store and the XBOX Marketplace. Produced at the Nickelodeon Animation Studios in Burbank, California, and animated in South Korea (where many animated television series are animated), it was co-created and executively produced by Michael Dante DiMartino and Bryan Konietzko.
  • A consistently high ratings performer in the Nicktoons lineup, even outside of its intended six-to-eleven-year-old demographic, Avatar: The Last Airbender is popular with both audiences and critics. The series' success prompted Nickelodeon to order a second twenty-episode season, which began airing on March 17, 2006,[1] and a third season has been announced to begin airing in 2007.[2] Notable merchandise based on the series include five DVD sets of episodes, six-inch scale action figures, a video game, stuffed animals distrubited by Paramount Parks, and two Lego sets.[3]
H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 05:38, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Medvedenko, are you by any chance suggesting that we try to make the production information end up like the one in the House article? [1] Or am I completely off the wall in saying that? Whydoit (Strangle Me for My Mistakes) 08:42, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Yes a section similar to House or other television articles is what I'm getting at. The Introduction shouldn't contain information that isn't found elsewhere in the article. Though I hope you'll be able to find more related information than whats already in the Introduction.Medvedenko 20:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
I fixed the sokka problem and the catation needed tag. Will work on free-use images. Cnriaczoy42 20:03, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
added Fair Use Rational to all images. Cnriaczoy42 20:18, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Recent images of Chinese characters do not have Fair Use rationale, but they should not be used anyway since it should be easy to get a free to use symbols. Also the use of lines in the Characters section makes the section look very ugly.Medvedenko 21:59, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm of the opinion that those images are not fair use at all, since they are not directly taken from the show, but were made by a Wikipedian, and depict ordinary (albeit archaic) Chinese characters that just happen to be in the show, and were not specifically created for the show itself. But I don't know enough to say for sure. And I really like the lines in the Characters section. I think they divide it up much better than just space, but I guess that's just one opinion. --Herald Alberich 23:13, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
The images clearly say they are a from a television show. They certainly look like they are from Avatar as well. Same art style. Medvedenko 00:48, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak support After reading the above I think all we really need to do is re-arrange some of the popularity and influence notes (maybe even elaborating/adding on a few?), but I also think along with H2P that I might only be supporting because of my own personal bias. Other than that the article had com a long way since the last nomination. Whydoit (Strangle Me for My Mistakes) 08:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak Support: It is a good article, but with the tag about the lead on it, I can only give it my weak support. I believe that the lead is okay, but at the same time I respect the talk page. On the talk page they claim that it does have some shortcomings, and I agree it is not perfect, but this article is still worthy of FA status.-Hairchrm 03:45, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I've never heard of the show before and so approached the article with a blank slate. I think that for someone in my position, the article gives a pretty good summary of the show. But I think more is needed to make the show a featured article:
    • "Media information" section simply is a link to the daughter page. It should be written to include several paragraphs or two in summary style.
      • Done, although it could use some cleaning up. Y BCZ 17:43, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
    • There's only two critical reactions listed, and it's a pseudonymous toonzone.net review and a SciFi.com piece, which is probably not sufficient. See The Wire (TV series) and Arrested Development for examples. I would like to know how general TV critics (i.e. those who don't work in a particular genre) have reviewed the show.
      • I will find more critics and list there sources within the next few days. Keep checking.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Parent5446 (talk • contribs).
    • "However, given that even Spirit-infused characters such as Princess Yue have been shown incapable of bending, there is also a likely genetic factor involved." How does this conclusion follow from that premise?
      • The article used to not have that sentance in it. I believe it flowed better without it and took it out.Cnriaczoy42 14:24, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
    • "Also, according to an interview with the artists involved in creating Avatar" not cited.
      • It is mentioned on the Book 1 DVD Box Set, 6th dvd. This is form the Appa Page. How do we cite a DVD refrence? Cnriaczoy42 18:23, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
    • "Zuko's principal rival throughout Book One." What is Book One? What is Book Two?
      • Added sentance explaining this. Cnriaczoy42 14:35, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
    • "Avatar also draws on a mix of Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Indian, Tibetan, Persian, Mongolian, and even Inuit philosophy, religion, language, clothing, martial arts and culture. " Where's the Inuit/Persian/Mongolian influence? The Chinese, Tibetan, etc. are all explained in the article but not the others. Where's the source for them?
    • "its intended 6-to-11-year-old demographic" Source?
    • "With consistently high ratings... Avatar is popular with both audiences and critics" I've mentioned the critics already, but what is the source for the ratings? Andrew Levine 00:57, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
      • I don't know how to add sources. Someone tack this on: [2]Y BCZ 17:14, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
        • <ref>{{cite web| url = |title = |accessdate= YYYY-MM-DD}}</ref> is how you source webcites. If you have to use it more than once use <ref name="insertnamehere"> in place of <ref> the first time and then <ref name="insertnamehere"/> every other time. Jay32183 17:24, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
        • see {{cite web}} and WP:CITE for further details. Jay32183 17:38, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
        • Much thanks, problem taken care of. Y BCZ 17:47, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../f/e/a/Wikipedia%7EFeatured_article_candidates_Avatar%7E_The_Last_Airbender_76fc.html"