Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Madman Muntz

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 User:SandyGeorgia 00:06, 4 June 2008 [1].

[edit] Madman Muntz

Self-nominator. I've put a great deal of work into this article, conformed all references to a singular style, copyedited, and passed GA. I haven't had a peer review, but figured the GA nom and pass would suffice in that regard. :-) Nobody of Consequence (talk) 07:13, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments from Gary King (talk · contribs)

• I noticed there are some references that appear before punctuation marks; they should appear after them, per WP:CITE.

Gary King (talk) 07:38, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

• Fixed. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 07:46, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

• Dates in references should also be wikilinked so that they format according to individual user preferences. Gary King (talk) 15:55, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

• You just mean actual article dates, right? The cite news/journal/etc. template instructions say accessdates should never be wikilinked. Will link the other dates. It's doing something really weird. I've added all the publishing dates using the ISO format specified in the template instructions (and did not wikilink per those instructions) but only some of them are changing according to my settings. I don't know why it's doing that but I think something is broken in the templates themselves. Never mind, fixed it. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 00:52, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• In infobox, "USA" → "United States"
• Perhaps give titles to the sections with dates? Such as "Early career" or whatever is suitable.

Gary King (talk) 19:35, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

• Fixed, I changed USA to simply United States and added titles to the date headings. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 04:15, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments

Support — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 11:20, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• Not many images. Although it's not an requirement, I would appreciate more.
• {{persondata}} should be used in biographies.
• There should be a non-breaking space between a number and the units it's measured in.
• "Earl William "Madman" Muntz (1914–1987),[1] born in Elgin, Illinois, was a merchandiser of cars and consumer electronics from the 1940s until his death in 1987." - the phrase "Born in Elgin, IL" seems extremely random and out-of-place in the middle of that sentence. I'd recommend removal, but it's just a suggestion.
• "Common opinion at the time dictated that used car salesmen should project a staid image, however Muntz completely rejected this thinking" - runon

More later. Nousernamesleft^{copper, not wood} 23:23, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

• Fixed. I added the persondata template, I think I caught all the spots that needed nbsp, deleted Elgin, IL from the lead sentence, and split the runon into two sentences. I'll have a look around for images, although we may be stuck with fair use stuff. :-/ Nobody of Consequence (talk) 01:24, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Added a couple more images. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 00:58, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Conditional support - "fatten it up," and this is a support. Nousernamesleft^{copper, not wood} 01:45, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I hope it looks better to you now. I added quite a bit more, particularly about his car and Stereo-Pak businesses. Hopefully I'll have a slow evening at work and will be able to include more about the stores his children run.Nobody of Consequence (talk) 20:18, 22 May 2008 (UTC) Couldn't find any more info about the stores after Muntz' death. But the article is now more detailed and complete than it was and has gone through a complete copyedit. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 23:07, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

• Support, I reviewed all the recent work and it looks vastly improved. Prose is excellent. --Laser brain (talk) 17:40, 29 May 2008 (UTC) Oppose I share Wackymacs' concern that this is not comprehensive, even though you have several good sources listed. The later sections are especially light considering this man's considerable legacy. I think some more research and expansion is needed before it's worth scrutinizing the text. I will say, however, that there are some confusions just from reading the lead. For example, you say TV sets and then TV receivers, seemingly referring to the same thing. I'm also not sure why you mention his seven marriages but only list two in the infobox. --Laser brain (talk) 15:32, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

While there are quite a few references (and I'm still working with the ones provided above), many of them contain pretty much the same information: they discuss his various businesses and his oddball TV ad character. I mention seven marriages for factual accuracy because he was married seven times (according to sources), however, I can only find information on two of the marriages (one source seemed to indicate he married 7 times as a promotional gimmick, but I find this dubious and so left it out). I can try to search marriage records to determine who the other 5 wives were and will do so. Will also change TV set to TV receiver throughout. And will try to add more about him and his businesses tonight. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 17:45, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I should be about to fatten this up quite a bit. The books on Google Books are proving extremely helpful! So far I've conformed all instances of TV receiver. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 00:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I've exhausted my sources for learning anything more about his other 5 marriages, unfortunately. LA country records didn't have anything online that I could access and I'm not sure I can get access to paper copies of his marriage licenses in a timely manner (or at all, as they have a ton of rules). So I deleted the 2 names from the infobox. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 20:18, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Note' My internet at home is nonfunctional at the moment, so I'm having to do this from work for a few days. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 20:36, 21 May 2008 (UTC) Back up and running. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 20:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

• Comment. What's practically the opening phrase: surely we normally call a "a merchandiser of cars" a "car salesman"? --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 02:43, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
• Still in the first paragraph: "television (TV) commercials." C'mon, do we really need to tell our readers that TV is the abbreviation for television, or even vice versa? --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 02:45, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
• "Muntzing" should be (briefly) explained in the lead, not simply wikilinked. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 02:46, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
• The "Early years" section seems to take us up to the 1950s. Is this a problem with the level of section heading? The stranded single sentence that would then make up the entirety of that section is somewhat problematic. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 02:49, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
• In general, this article still needs work. But the guy's obviously quite a character, so I hope it can be brought up to FA standard for that reason if none other. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 02:51, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

• Will respond on by one: 1) I believe that if we change it to alter "merchandiser of cars" to "car salesman" it will change the meaning. "Car salesman" is just someone who sells cars, while Muntz owned his own lots. I think "Merchandiser" does a better job of setting him apart in this regard. 2) Perhaps it's not mandatory, however it's common copyediting practice to always spell out first and use an abbreviation afterwards. I feel that doing so here makes the article consistent. This change was made by someone who was asked to copyedit the article (it's been through a couple of thorough copyedits). 3) Why should Muntzing be described in the lead rather than wikilinked? I'm concerned that adding a description would disrupt the (relative) balance of the lead paragraphs 4) I'm not sure I understand your concern with the section headings... The "Early Years" main section does take us through the 1950s. "Audio and Video" begins with an intro that described how he transitioned from his early businesses into other areas. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 06:04, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

  1) sounds decidedly awkward as is, and I'm not convinced of the difference; 2) this really does seem unnecessary; 3) beyond the fact that I don't like being forced to click on a wikilink to understand an article (a wikilink should lead me to extra information, not to essential information), in that his invention of "muntzing" is apparently an important aspect of his achievements and a prime indicator of notability, it should be spelled out, however briefly; 4) then I suggest a reworking of the sections, as in most similar articles "early years" is taken to refer to childhood and youth, rather than taking us to the subject's forties. But again, these are really sample issues. I do think the article needs to be looked at again. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 06:38, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

• 1) I disagree, I think this sentence is succinct and accurate. A "car salesman" is any old person who sells cars. Muntz was a business owner. Are you really telling me that you can't see the difference between an employee and the business owner? 2) ok, I will remove the parenthetical. 3) Muntzing is actually described in some detail in the section about Muntz TV. I will attempt to add a brief explanation of it. 4) I'm not opposed to changing titles but I would very much rather not start doing a full rework of the sections. They've already been shuffled and reshuffled, rewritten, edited, etc. and I don't see how a total rework would make a difference. I'll try to work with the headings though. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 04:36, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

• Looks good after your edits. Lead sentence is better. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 21:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

• Comments Support
• I found it an interesting article. It made me want to learn more about him, and I think the article doesn't really quite give an entire picture of the man. I like that his advertising ploys are described, but there's not much about him behind the camera. I don't quite believe someone as innovative as Muntz, according to the article, was motivated completely by money. Why invent so many things? Why be so creative? Is there nothing more about his early life? His birth date, anything about how he grew up? Someone who craved publicity so much must have more about his childhood.
• The image of the Muntz Jet - is that a vanity shot?
• I like the article. I particularly like the potential of an FA on someone like Muntz. Is it possible to answer any of these questions? I would like to support. --Moni3 (talk) 01:31, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

• Glad you like it! I wish there was more about his childhood, but I've exhausted all of my reliable sources. A documentary about him is tentatively set for limited release in the late summer and I'm sure it will have all kinds of great stuff about his personal life, etc. But I'm not sure film biopics would fulfill WP:RS and it's not coming out for a couple more months at least. As for your question about the Muntz Jet... I'm not sure what a vanity shot is... someone requested above that I add more photos to the article if possible, and since this was free it seemed like a nice addition. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 04:36, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I read through it again. A vanity shot is a photo of an object with someone's family member in it. As in, here's a famous hill and here's my son! They're not particularly classy. Somewhere down the line someone will probably point out that it's in bad form. I'm not going to oppose based on the image, but have you thought about contacting Muntz's estate to get GNU permission for a better image? --Moni3 (talk) 20:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

• Oh okay, I see what you mean. Nope, I don't know who that person in the picture is (I'm actually the one who uploaded it to Commons). I'll just crop them out of it and update it on commons. Fixed, I cropped and uploaded a new version to remove the random middle-aged woman. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 20:31, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm supporting, but I did a very cursory search for information on Muntz and was unable to find anything. If you're in California, you may have access to the California (Or Los Angeles) Historical Society journal. Perhaps a regional advertising magazine. The article at its present state I feel is feature-worthy, but incomplete. I wish there were more about his background. But nonetheless, well done. --Moni3 (talk) 17:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

CommentsSupport—the prose could do with a careful (and quick) run-through; it's mostly OK. But I noticed the following things at random.

• Lead: Dash after "persona" rather than comma, to signal that it's not all a list. Remove "also"—both of them. "and divorced six times".
• MOS breach: use sentence, not title case for titles.
• "would later be copied" --> just "was later copied". And weed out the other "would"s in this sense.
• "New York-area electronics chain"—ouch. I think you need two hyphens here, if you really need "area" at all.
• Muntz', I think, needs a final "s".
• You gonna stubbify one or two of those redlinks?
• "1/4-inch (1 cm)"—the conversion is very imprecise. Try "0.6 cm", with a non-breaking space.
• "8mm video"—is that article title linked to a mistake? Surely spaced. Needs piping.
• "After he died, his children, James and Tee, continued to operate two Muntz stores in Van Nuys and Newhall; the remainder were franchised businesses."—His children were franchised businesses? Relationship between these ideas is unclear.
• Fair-use justification of the bottom pic: "irreplaceable as the original source (Los Angeles Times), is copyrighted." Um, no, that's not what we mean by "irreplaceable". Can you change it? See NFCC. TONY (talk) 12:02, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This is probably worthy of promotion after polishing. TONY (talk) 12:02, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

• Ok, I'll have a look tonight unless someone else beats me to it. I did improve the fair use rationale. Fixed all of these. I wasn't sure if I was supposed to use sentence format for book titles as well as newspaper titles, but I did, figuring everything should be consistent. Let me know if that's wrong. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 18:35, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I much prefer sentence case for everything, but I think MOS is OK about title case for books, etc. TONY (talk) 06:05, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

• "acceleration of 0 to 50 miles per hour (80 km/h) in 6 seconds"—I'd make it: "acceleration of 0–50 miles an hour (0–80 km/h) in six seconds".
• Why the split lines for "Communist Party? / "[refs]
• Space before ellipsis dots unless end of sentence ...

TONY (talk) 06:05, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

• Fixed the mph/kph conversion and the ellipsis spacing. I'm confused about the Communist Party split lines comment ... please clarify? Nobody of Consequence (talk) 07:13, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

• I'm not sure, but I think the problem is that you have one quotation, but two references; which is the source for that quotation? (If that's not Tony's problem, it is mine.) --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 18:13, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

• Both refs support the same quote. I figured a claim that he showed interest in joining the communist party for publicity reasons could potentially be controversial, so I provided two references to hopefully alleviate any concerns folks may have. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 18:26, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
  • As far as I'm concerned (and I recognize that this may also be a pet peeve) one reliable source is always enough, so long as other sources don't contradict it. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 18:30, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

• Ok, I took out the first ref. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 20:28, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

• Comments. Heh, am I being more of a stickler on prose than Tony, eh? Anyhow, I think the article could still do with a run through. To see the kinds of things I'd suggest, look at my own recent copy-editing. What's more, I notice that hardly any of the references have page numbers. This seems like a serious lapse. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 17:33, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
• The lead has a paragraph on his wives and celebrity friends, but there's nothing of the sort in the article itself. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 18:11, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

• Pretty much all of the book refs were found in a google books search, so I can probably get the page numbers tonight or in the next couple days. As for the paragraph about his wives and celebrity friends, this is one of those areas that I haven't been able to expand on. Originally (ages ago), this was in the body of the article in a section about his personal life. But that section was really small and during the GA review, it was suggested that I increase the size of what was then a pretty small lead with the smaller bits in the body that I couldn't expand on. The refs say who two of his 7 wives were, that Phyllis Diller was his girlfriend at one point, and that he was friends with the other famous people but I haven't been able to find any greater details about any of these relationships. I haven't even been able to learn who his other 5 wives were. :-( Nobody of Consequence (talk) 18:26, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
  • My understanding of WP:LEAD is that there shouldn't be anything there that isn't in the body, and vice versa. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 18:28, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

• I see what you mean. It seems to suggest that the lead should summarize the article, provide a concise overview, and not tease readers with info that isn't expanded on in the article. However, I'd argue for keeping the info in the lead as-is for a couple reasons: 1) removing it entirely would shorten the lead quite a bit and earlier issues with the article included a too-short lead, 2) While the guideline does say the lead "shouldn't" tease readers, it doesn't explicitly prohibit it, and in addition, the guideline lead box states that occasional exceptions can be made. Logically, of course, we should learn more about Muntz's personal life and add a section the the article body. I can give this another try, or if there's some way to incorporate it into the body with a shortened lead sentence I'd be open to that too but I don't want to "Muntz" this article too much. :-/ I'll see what I can do about it tonight. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 20:28, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.