Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Beginning of the End (Lost)

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 promoted 02:29, 3 March 2008.

[edit] The Beginning of the End (Lost)

Check external links

Hello, I am self-nominating this article on the fourth season premiere of the television show Lost, which appeared in did you know? on November 18, 2007. This article is part of the Lost WikiProject. Why am I not waiting for the DVD, which will have commentary, to be released? Because the commentaries for episodes 1x01, 1x02 and 3x01 are the worst in the world. Only one minute of each commentary contained useful information, which translates to one or two sentences in Wikipedia. The other forty-two minutes were occupied by Damon Lindelof and J.J. Abrams praising the acting skills of the cast (including the character of Michelle the flight attendant who had three lines: "Can I get you a refill?" and "You, sir, can I get you anything? Cocktail? Soda?" and "Coffee. Sure.") and Elizabeth Mitchell laughing at stuff that is not funny. Thanks, –thedemonhog talk • edits 07:16, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Support - thedemonhog strikes back! As usual, a great read, and as usual, a few things worth mentioning:
    • The numbers! Geez, they ought not to have so many (or as confusing) MoS rules about numbers! The only thing I'll bother disagreeing with is the mention of "17 episodes" in the lead, which can quite effortlessly be spelled out because it's a one-word number.
    • The filming location of "Oahu, Hawaii, USA" is also brought up in the lead - to me that's like saying Canada, North America. The full title seems a tad unnecessary but if there's some protocol that justifies its inclusion could we put some full-stops/periods/whatever-anyone-may-call-them in there (as in U.S.A. or just U.S.) which is enforced by some MoS subpage somewhere. I think.
    • In the third paragraph of the plot summary, I don't think Hurley is once referred to as "he". Could we change at least a few Hurleys in there to make it slightly more readable?
    • "Hurley imagines that Charlie is swimming outside the interrogation room and floods the room" - Charlie floods the room? Or Hurley floods the room? Some re-wording, maybe?
    • We also have inconsistent references to the "Oceanic Six" and "Oceanic 6". Either would be good.
    • In the first sentence of Production, maybe mention Jeremy Davies' full name as he's only previously referred to in the lead.
    • Second paragraph, Production: should Ben Linus be linked? It's a little pedantic, but all other names seem to be linked only once in the plot synopsis.
    • In Broadcast, there are several references to viewership rankings, such as "sixth most watched" etc. - IMO there should be at least one hyphen in there somewhere, maybe "sixth-most watched" or "sixth most-watched", maybe not "sixth-most-watched". Don't know. Thoughts?
    • "The first four episodes of the fourth season have been seen by TV Guide, who described them as..." Although it's how I'd instinctively say it, it seems like a publication should be referred to as a "which" rather than a "who".
    • Why is the statement "BuddyTV dubbed "The Beginning of the End" "the most anticipated season premiere of the year"" in the Broadcast section, not Reception. There's probably a good reason. Oh, and I guess it's only kind of reception if it's anticipation.
  • Again, my hat off to you, and hope all goes well. •97198 talk 09:44, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Oh, and I'd have to support you on the DVD commentaries. I watched some Season 2 episode w/commentary and I've never dared to try another. •97198 talk 09:45, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
      • I thought that "the most anticipated season premiere of the year" was not about how it was received, so that is why it is not in reception, but I am fine if you want to move it. All other concerns have been dealt with. –thedemonhog talk • edits 20:57, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
    • I support, sounds like a good idea. Besides, they've done Through the Looking Glass before. THE KC (talk) 15:18, 18 February 2008 (UTC).
  • Comment - Do we need the cast listed in the infobox? They are literally relisted in the plot directly beside themselves. I don't think a single name is missing from either side.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 12:35, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
    • The writers, director, airdate and title are also in the body of the article, yet the infobox is still used. –thedemonhog talk • edits 15:29, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
      • It just seems excessively unnecessary give the length of the cast and their repeated listing just to the left of the box. If it was only a couple of names, I could see that, but you list every guest star for the episode and then relist them in the plot. I would think that the plot is more pertinent given that their character names with them.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:44, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment WP:NFCC concern:
    • NFCC#8 states "Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." Image: They_need_you.png‎, which has the stated purpose of "show[ing] the making of the episode" does not seem to fulfill that purpose. It does not appear to contribute significantly to our understanding of production or the episode itself. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 03:57, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment Statements such as, USA Today wrote that "returning with a heart-stopping, perfectly pitched episode … Lost is an oasis in a strike-parched TV desert." need to acknowledge the person who said it. In this case the quote should be attributed to Robert Bianco, one person does not represent the entire publication, so "Robert Bianco of USA Today wrote..." M3tal H3ad (talk) 06:02, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Support Oppose, there are some copy issues, audience assumptions, and other minor issues that need addressing: --Laser brain (talk) 16:33, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
    • The prose does not currently meet criterion 1a. Please get an uninvolved editor to copyedit for tone, grammar, comma use, mixed verb tenses, and more.
    • The names in the infobox should be separated by line breaks and not commas. Check the Usage heading for {{Infobox Television episode}}.
      • Without commas, it is harder to tell where one name starts and another ends.
        • The line break (<br />) puts each name on a new line. --Laser brain (talk) 21:18, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
          • That is being used (well, <br> is, but they are pretty much the same); however, sometimes names are so long that they are split into two lines and it becomes slightly more confusing. –thedemonhog talk • edits 00:53, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
            • I see that it is being used - so you just need to take out the commas. The image in the infobox is quite a bit wider than any of the names so you shouldn't have any splitting to the next line. --Laser brain (talk) 05:22, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
              • But then it will be inconsistent with other Lost episode FAs where some names are split up. –thedemonhog talk • edits 05:28, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
                • I still don't understand the issue here. The instructions for the television infobox say to using line breaks but not commas. Other infoboxes are the same way, because including commas is redundant. You are already providing a visual cue to the reader that separates each name (the line break) so the comma is not needed. In the rare case that a long name runs to the next line, readers can click it or just read the article to see that it is one name. That other Lost articles are doing it is not a good reason to keep it - if anything, it is a reason to fix them. --Laser brain (talk) 14:27, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
    • The "Portion used" field of the fair use rationale for Image:The Beginning of the End.png is not correct. A frame cannot be 40 minutes (the one for Image:They need you.png is correct).
      • Fixed.
    • In the Broadcast heading, you talk about the show airing at 9:00pm. Is that ET? Specify time zone. Also, you state that time slot is "prestigious" but your source doesn't back that up.
      • Fixed.
    • Check WP:DASH. There are hyphens in the article that should be en dashes and em dashes. Also, some dashes/hyphens have spaces around them and some don't.
    • You make several assumptions that the article reader will be familiar with Lost or arrive from other related articles. That's not necessarily the case - Wikipedia has a general audience. Assume that readers will go to the main article for details about the show, but provide them some context and make sure the narrative stands on its own. An editor who is unfamiliar with the show should check the whole article, but here are examples:
      • "The narrative takes place 93 days after the crash, on December 23, 2004." What crash? The one referred to in the next sentence? If so, reword for clarity.
        • Fixed.
      • The plot section immediately loses me as it provides no context. Right away someone is knifing someone who uses "the satellite phone". Then she dies. Then a cabin. A cabin on the freighter? A log cabin? Where are we? Then we move on to hallucinations? A dream? I dare not read further.
        • This came up at the FAC for the previous episode. I orginally had a background section but it has been removed. To quote Bignole: It seems to me that the article is giving an awful lot of important to the in-universe part of this topic. Like, do we need the background episode? The background information is equivalent to the plot of this episode. I mean, you don't see "Background" for Halloween II, a featured film article? At the current moment, all of the Lost episodes still have their own article, so ther isn't a need to recap all those episodes. We aren't ABC, it shouldn't be our job to "get the reader up to speed". That is what watching the show is for. I get that it's important to fans, but if you are going to explain what led to this episode you might as well explain everything on for the series. It's truly not necessary. If it was, does that mean we need a "Background" for the final episode of the entire series? That would be a pretty long recap … I don't think it's necessary, considering it could become very tedious is you want consistency. I think the problem is that it's an episode late in the series, and not something like a pilot that doesn't have backstory, or a Simpsons episode that has no continuity whatsoever anyway. Try reading the plot for the episode, and see if that summarizes the entire episode well enough. The way I see it, if someone is reading the article on the season 3 finale, they probably know the rest of the series anyway, or have atleast read all the preceeding pages.
          • Hm, I see your point. I am striking this item since it seems to be larger than just this one article. --Laser brain (talk) 21:18, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
      • Why do you refer to some characters by their first names and some by their last names?
        • It is by what they are best known by. There is WikiProject consensus for this.
    • There are some grammatically ambiguous phrases where you use general pronouns and nouns and it's unclear who or what you are talking about. Check the whole article, but here are examples:
      • "...but the survivors divide when they hear that they are not who they claim to be." Too many dubious they's.
        • Fixed.
      • "Hurley has visions of his deceased friend Charlie Pace (Dominic Monaghan), while he grieves over his death on the island." Who grieves over whose death?
  • Support - although a slight concern over the "They Need You" picture. Will (talk) 15:47, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment I have a few suggestions for prose improvement, but I am reluctant to do the changes myself. You don't have to explain (to me at least) if one of these suggestions is unactionable or otherwise a bad idea
    • The word "episode" is mentioned five times in three consecutive sentences in the intro
    • "The Constant" (four episodes later) takes place on December 24. I am already keeping track of the in-universe date inconsistancy via lostpedia, and I know it's not your fault, but the article is reporting a seemingly false date with "December 23" now.
      • This is a problem
    • It might be a good idea to specifically reference the Season 3 finale early in the plot section to give the non-die-hard reader more context (and a direct non-ref link)
    • "Hurley runs away, but finds himself in front of the same cabin. He squeezes his eyes shut and when he opens them, the building is gone and Locke appears." - doesn't get the point across why this plot detail is necessary, so either expand to explain (risky for OR) or trim
    • "After his escape from the island," - state that this is a flashforward in the narrative, because the plot really jumps at this point
    • Consider linking "Oceanic Six" (I know it's a redirect) because this seems like an important in-universe link for future episodes
    • I am always having trouble with reading "For example" in texts because it tends to sound like the editor is trying to support his own original analysis
    • "Hurley imagines that Charlie is swimming outside the interrogation room" - this is very hard to imagine for someone who has never seen the episode. Consider something like "When Hurley looks at the interrogation room's mirror glass, he imagines seeing Charlie swimming in water until he breaks the glass and floods the room"
    • "While casting characters, fake names..." - when I read this for the first time, I misinterpreted the word "casting" as an adverb/adjective(?) instead of a verb
    • "The character's surname was chosen by the writers after..." -> "The writers chose the character's surname after..."
    • "Filming took place began August 17" - which verb do you want to use? :-)
    • "Garcia felt "a little pressure" because he has the lead role" - tense
    • "swimming outside and breaking the glass" in two consecutive sentences
    • link episode 408 (the episode title was officially announced yesterday I believe)
    • episode/scene "shot" in two consecutive sentences -> one can be replaced by e.g. "filmed"
    • The first three sentences of the "Broadcast" section are all interrupted by semicolons. Consider eliminating at least two of them to get a better flow.
    • "Alan Sepinwall of The Star-Ledger commented that "I don't know if Lost is ever going..."" -> "Alan Sepinwall of The Star-Ledger was unsure if "Lost is ever going...""
    • "In reviews that were less positive than most" -> "In less positive reviews"
    • "rated the episode with three stars" - what is the maximum of stars?
– sgeureka t•c 21:32, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Support, but I agree with Will about the whole stunt double picture. Can we get a screenshot, maybe? THE KC (talk) 01:20, 2 March 2008 (UTC).

Sure, I will get to that in a few hours. –thedemonhog talk • edits 01:23, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Done. –thedemonhog talk • edits 03:44, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Note; the article has what appears to be a clear copyvio at a blogger.com source, sources aren't accurately identified (blogger.com isn't identified as the publisher there), and the external link checker says there's a dead link at calendarlive.com. Some of the citations list the publisher before the article title; others list them after. Please see this. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:53, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
    • Sorry about the copyvio and dead link, which have been fixed. When the publisher is given before the title, no author is given. These are often press releases. –thedemonhog talk • edits 00:41, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.