Talk:The Chaser APEC pranks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Chaser APEC pranks article.
Article policies
Good article The Chaser APEC pranks has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
An entry from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on November 10, 2007.
Flag
Portal
 The Chaser APEC pranks is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.
This article is supported by WikiProject Australian politics.
This article is supported by WikiProject Australian television.
Assessment comments
Comedy Portal
This article is within the scope of the Comedy WikiProject, which collaborates on articles related to comedy, comics, comedians, comedy movies, and the like. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.

A request has been made for this article to be copyedited by the League of Copyeditors. The progress of its reviewers is recorded below. The League is always in need of editors with a good grasp of English to review articles. Visit the Project page if you are interested in helping.
Add comments

Reminder: This article is based solely on the APEC pranks in September 2007. Also, on some of my edits i accidently click minor edit when they are quite major...sorry! Jasewase (talk) 04:26, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] New article

I have created this new article as I believe this is an important event in the history of The Chaser, and its successful program, The Chaser's War on Everything. To prove this, I have already got 17kb of content, more than enough for an established article. Please feel free to offer thoughts here. And for thoughts about the general article and the suggestion for it to be split/changed/whatever, this is not the place...cheers Jasewase 12:58, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Actual stunt

Under the heading "Breach of APEC securite" or whatever. There is actually only one paragraph on the actual stunt. Where's the detail? Isn't this article all about the prank?  SpecialWindler talk (currently offline)  09:09, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

this article is on the series of APEC pranks, as noted in the introduction. i know the article title is vague, so i might change it later. as for the actual breach: im still working on putting in more detail..ive being working on the other sections recently...please bear with me. Jasewase 09:55, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
these issues are now fixed. the title has been changed, and the introduction reflects that. the actual event is now more detailed, but im not sure if enough sourcing is given. Jasewase 11:41, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

It has more detail, but the problem is, especially with the main prank, is that it isn't in order. May I suggest the following headings

  • Overview of APEC
  • Early stunts
(mention stunts done before major breach)
  • APEC breach
    • Planning
    • Breach of APEC security
    • Aftermath
    • Media response
    • Public response
    • Legal action
  • Post APEC breach
(mention stunts after major breach)
  • References, External links ...

You need to put things in order because it will repeat itself. You start with (in the "APEC stunts" section, with them being arrested, that would be the last thing. While the above headings are only a suggestion, I am considering helping this article myself, to get up to GA status, though I might not.  SpecialWindler talk (currently offline)  09:21, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

This radio source has some behind the scenes stuff on the main APEC stunt. [1]. It has Morrow and Reucassel talking with some radio hosts about various things to do with Chaser and APEC.  SpecialWindler talk (currently offline)  09:41, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
ive reordered the sections and prioritised the actual major prank. thanks for suggestion with the radio source too. Jasewase 10:56, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SFA?

Sorry, is that supposed to mean something in the article? -- Kendrick7talk 23:15, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

the team mentioned it in the episode - its a bit vague i'll remove it Jasewase 23:21, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ga nomination

I'm sorry Jasewase, but I withdrew the GA nomination. You need to have patience. The following reasons is why I with drew it.

  1. The article dosen't meet good article criteria.
  2. The article is still undergoing a peer review. (It should not have both happening at same time)
  3. The article was only created less than a week ago, and hasn't been able to expand.

Jasewase, you need patience. Let the peer review finish, then if it meets the criteria then nominate.

Criteria it dosen't currently meet:

  • Prose (There is a list under "Other pranks" section, plus few errors)
  • Verifibilty
    • For example the "The Chaser's response" section is unreferenced. (You have an external link withing prose, which shouldn't happen. Just reference the radio website.)
    • (Same with the Today Tonight paragraph in above section)
  • The see also link is a redirect and dosen't go to where it implies.

Im sorry to cause this, but nominating it for early GA, is pointless. If you still want to nominate, please discuss. By the end of November, it should be ready.  SpecialWindler talk (currently offline)  10:50, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

hehe i knew this would happen, but it just seems theres not much more to add (just court verdict) Jasewase 12:22, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
btw fixed all verifibility issues listed above, and see also like. the list has also been modified slightly, but not completely removed. Jasewase 12:51, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
It may comprehensive, but may not be up to scratch. Ask a "FA" reviewer to peer review the article for you. As for the "Other pranks" section. It needs to be converted from list to prose. Meaning no bullet points.  SpecialWindler talk (currently offline)  20:02, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
how did the chasers war on everything get away with four lists then? Jasewase 05:21, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Well they are a little different, due that you can't really put segments into prose. You should only use lists when necassary. There is nothing bad about a list and it would probably pass GA status with it but per WP:EMBED then "Most Wikipedia articles should consist of prose".  SpecialWindler talk (currently offline)  08:02, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] images

i need at least one more image for the article - preferably free use, to accompany this. It can be the major stunt or related to one of the minor ones. i cant find any that are suitable and im not familiar with licensing, sourcing etc... Jasewase 10:25, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Due to the nature of the subject, any image showing the Chaser at the scene would be fair use. Because the arn't replaceable. We can't exactly ask the Chaser to rebreak into APEC, so we won't find a free image. Though we can find a fair use one. If you need help Jasewase, don't hesitate to ask me (on my talk page preferably).  SpecialWindler talk (currently offline)  10:58, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] issues

almost GA, but some issues need fixed. would like opinions...

  • remove links for dates?
  • a lot of repetitive news references
  • i need help on creating an infobox, if appropriate
  • lengthening of intro?
  • IMAGES, free use is great but i have no idea what the process is...basically anything that is mentioned in the article will do (you can see i was desperate with the APEC logo...)
  • some rewording issues identified by auto peer review

maybe others ive missed as well. cheers Jasewase (talk) 04:48, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Full dates like 20 November 2007 should be linked, dates like 2007 or November 2007 shouldn't be linked unless they are relevant to the context of the article. There might be duplicates of news references (none that I have spotted), so we should use <ref name="name" />. I don't think an infobox is applicable for this article, not all articles require infoboxes anyway. Yep, the longer the introduction the better. I reckon that a screenshot of the episode aired featuring the stunts should be uploaded, but only if it is used here, so it meets the non-free content criteria, but I don't think that an APEC logo would "significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic" much at all... and I'll see what I can do in regards to prose and the wording of the article. I'm sure that with more work towards keeping the article fully reliable and well written, the article will be promoted. Good work so far, though :) Spebi 05:02, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
ok thanks for the reply i'll do what i can Jasewase (talk) 05:13, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
and also when i said repetitive news references - i meant that i do use the same reference for different points in the article. it's just that when you look through the references list and look at the articles themselves, a lot of them have information that is repeated in many of the other sources. becomes a bit of a mess really... Jasewase (talk) 05:18, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ga nomination

I think it is time for this article to be nominated again. It should meet all the criteria, and at the minimum, be put on hold. I'll let Jasewese make the decision as she is the main contributor to this article.  SpecialWindler talk (currently offline)  19:42, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

feel free to nominate it. i am currently away on extended holiday. Jasewase (talk) 09:28, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] quotebox

Julian Morrow is referred to as "executive producer" in the quotebox. Is this the best way to describe him. While it is true, he is not best known for that.  SpecialWindler talk (currently offline)  11:30, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GAN

Just as a note, this was passed as a GA by Whiteandnerdy111 (talk · contribs). I'm not opposed to the passing and won't go to GAR, but yeah, it's odd there was no review or anything... — Dihydrogen Monoxide 23:16, 11 December 2007 (UTC)