Talk:New World Order (The Falcon and the Winter Soldier)

Potential ref

/Film interview, described as a discussion on the first episode. It read a little bit as "over-arching" for the series, but maybe after the first episode has released, there will be some good material to add in. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:53, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

FYI, I have added details from this source. - adamstom97 (talk) 02:45, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Ethnicity

Someone wrote in the plot section "an elder Chinese man named Yori" but this seems unlikely. Actor Ken Takemoto who plays Yori is an American from Hawaii with Japanese parents.[1] His son is played by Akie Kotabe another American actor, from a Japanese family.[2] It is far more likely that the characters are supposed to be American (or Japanese American) not Chinese.

The reviewer at TheRinger thought the character was Japanese.[3] The reviewer at Slate thought the character was Japanese too.[4] Also Vulture.com thought he was Japanese.[5]

We probably don't need to mention his ethnicity at all, so I'm going to remove it from the Plot section. -- 109.78.198.254 (talk) 04:39, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Don't worry, it has been removed already. —El Millo (talk) 04:40, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

I was about to change it, then I noticed User:Facu-el Millo had reverted the plot section to a better version that does not mention the old man's ethnicity at all. Hopefully no one will try to add it back in again. -- 109.78.198.254 (talk) 04:53, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Fans reaction

I added some text about the fan reaction to the new Captain America on the Russian Wikipedia. Maybe it also will transfer here? — Vladlen Manilov (talk) 05:15, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

What? It is not clear what you mean. Fan reactions always faces the problem of finding reliable sources.

Google Translate was being difficult but I eventually got it to work and apparently some users reacted to John Walker by posting the tag #NotMyCap

If it gains more traction and reliable sources in mainstream media decide to report on it then maybe it could be added. It seems to have gotten a little coverage from places that report on fandom but it does not seem to have made a big enough impact for more mainstream sources to report on it. It is still possible that reviewers will mention it or discuss fan reaction when episode 2 airs, but editors should be very careful about finding reliable sources when attempting to comment on fan reaction. -- 109.79.80.28 (talk) 15:58, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Episode images

@Jhenderson777:, @TriiipleThreat:, @Facu-el Millo: @BD2412:, @Gonnym: @Jedi94:, @Trailblazer101:, @InfiniteNexus:, @Sir Magnus:, @(a)nnihilation97:, @Bloodyboppa:, @Favre1fan93:, @LoreMaster22: @SirLou:, @Adamstom.97:, @Netoholic:, @Starforce13: What would you say about having a still from the episode in the infobox for each episode of TFATWS, since there are no episode title cards? An example of this being done is Happy Ending (Schitt's Creek), a WP:GA. IronManCap (talk) 18:50, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Currently discussing using the released posters at Power Broker's talk page here. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:52, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

@Favre1fan93: Thanks, I didn’t know about that. Sorry for the unnecessary pings then. IronManCap (talk) 18:56, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

All good. You can join that discussion if you like, since it will most likely end up applying to all episodes if consensus is to use those posters. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:57, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Source for music section expansion

I found this interview that could be used. I will work on it when I have time. https://www.syfy.com/sites/syfy/themes/custom/syfy_amp/favicon.ico Squeezdakat (talk) 14:52, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Nevermind, I realized the series article already has them Squeezdakat (talk) 11:55, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

GAN

@Favre1fan93 @Adamstom.97 @ZooBlazer Hey guys, so I was thinking if this article was perhaps ready for a GAN. Do you guys think it's ready or is there anything more that should be done? Dcdiehardfan (talk) 17:45, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

I think there is still more work to be done at these episode articles which I discussed at the series article at one point. I think some of the Phase Four film articles are closer to being ready which is why I recently went ahead with work on Black Widow and Shang-Chi rather than continue with the exact release order here. - adamstom97 (talk) 18:03, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

@Adamstom.97 Congrats on getting Black Widow to GA status. With that being said, do you have any suggestions on what info needs to be added, for this article in particular? I can only see maybe Reception needing to be a bit more fleshed out with a review or so, but I think there is ample production content. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 19:01, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

This one seems close. I'll try to lend a clean up hand. I don't believe I'm sitting on any articles in my personal saved list to add. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:56, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

I guess just looking at episode 1 of WandaVision as sort of a template, some info on editing, or additional info on filming or VFX could be added if anymore can be found. It might already be pretty much covered though based on my memory of searching in the past. I know it won't be the same amount as WandaVision based on the overall media coverage. -- ZooBlazer^talk 02:27, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

I got one source for filming, and I'll work to see if I have any other material. On this note, I'll just put the link here for myself, and also in case anyone else wants to integrate it [6] and [7], which is VFX info on the opening action sequence. Also, note to add the Dobbins ARB as a filming location as per this [8] Dcdiehardfan (talk) 04:15, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Also just a note for me, again, but this source is used for the "hot potato" action sequence [9] Dcdiehardfan (talk) 04:16, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

@Adamstom.97 @Favre1fan93 @ZooBlazer Alright I've added some more filming and VFX info. Do you guys think that's enough or is there any other content that needs to be added? I think we got all the bases, if not all, covered as of now. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 21:59, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

At this point, it's probably about as good as it's gonna get for info, so I'd say it's probably ready. A full page ce may be useful first though. -- ZooBlazer^talk 22:14, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

@ZooBlazer Yea, a CE is definitely in order. Once that's done, I think I'll ask the question, who would like to nominate this for GA? I think it should either be adam or Favre as they have been amongst the biggest contributors to the article. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 22:41, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

@Dcdiehardfan Yeah, I'd say they have first dibs, but if they don't want to do it, you qualify as one of the top contributors now it looks like. -- ZooBlazer^talk 22:51, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

@ZooBlazer Sounds good. Would you perhaps like to do a full-page CE in the meantime and then proceed to Episode 2? Dcdiehardfan (talk) 20:22, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Previously I had told you guys not to wait for me to try get these to GA, but I have had a lot more time recently for wiki work and would be keen to help out. I would like to do what I did for Black Widow and Shang-Chi where I did a full c/e and review for anything I felt was missing. So maybe if you want to continue with the work you have been discussing in this section and let me know when you are done, and then I can go through and do a final review before we make a decision? - adamstom97 (talk) 22:31, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

@Adamstom.97 Welcome back! With that being said, I'm very pleased to inform you that I have indeed made substantial edits in the last few days and inserted more writing and filming/VFX content (I've integrated all the sources above), so I believe we are ready for your full page CE/review. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 22:36, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Are you planning to make similar changes to all of the episode articles or just the first two? I was thinking we could get all of the episodes ready, nominate the first one, make any applicable changes from the first review to the other episode articles, nominate all of them, and once all the episode articles are GA we can nominate the series article. I don't remember if that is the exact order we did it in for WandaVision but it is similar. - adamstom97 (talk) 22:45, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

@Adamstom.97 I'm definitely planning on sticking around and helping to improve all the episode articles. I agree that using this article's future GAR as a template for improving other articles, but I think we should go ahead and proceed with a GAR for each article when we think it's ready rather than simply waiting around till all of them are done and then going back for Ep 1 and whatnot. So my order would look like this: NWO GA prep -> NWO GAR (implementation and promotion) -> Freelance and integrate info across all the episode articles -> Go sequentially and get GARs going for each article once ready -> Repeat process until all articles are promoted Dcdiehardfan (talk) 23:20, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

I'll be around to help with the series and episode articles as well if needed. -- ZooBlazer^talk 23:34, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Wonderful! I would also like to inform everyone here that I have also performed a preliminary edit on Ep 2, inserting additional writing content there. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 00:49, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

@Adamstom.97 Any updates on if you will potentially plan on going through with a whole page CE? Dcdiehardfan (talk) 23:28, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

This is definitely on my radar for the near future. - adamstom97 (talk) 23:47, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

@Adamstom.97 Alright no worries. Just make sure to notify us either when you're ready for the CE or when it's been completed! Dcdiehardfan (talk) 02:16, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Adamstom.97! I hope everything's going well with you thus far. This is just a gentle reminder that hopefully, at your discretion, you will be able to take a good look over the article and see if it's fit for GAN. Also pinging @ZooBlazer to ensure that I have renewed interest in getting the getting the series to GA status. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 03:14, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

@Dcdiehardfan: Yeah, I should still be able to help now that I'm in a waiting period on a few of my other wiki projects. @Favre1fan93 and Trailblazer101: either of you want to help knock out this project that's been slowly progressing for a while? -- ZooBlazer 03:41, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

I've recently been getting into a lot of c/e-ing projects for the recent superhero adaptations, and this is one that is next on the docket for me to help take a stab at. Trailblazer101 (talk) 04:25, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

@Trailblazer101 Nice! I'm looking forward to hearing your feedback. I personally think that there is absolutely enough information in the article for it to become a GA, and all that's really left at this point is just additional CE and so on. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 23:13, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

It looks pretty good to me unless someone has some refs they've had saved that need added still. The only real short section is music, but I'm not sure if there's much episode specific info for that. -- ZooBlazer 23:45, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Yea, maybe at most for Music, we would need to insert a table that has all the tracks used in the episode, although I'm not sure if that's necessary. Btw, is it ok with you all if I initiate the nomination and I add you folks as co-noms? Dcdiehardfan (talk) 23:51, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

I'd wait to see if Trailblazer wants to do his c/e work first -- ZooBlazer 00:01, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

@ZooBlazer For sure. I was just asking if that was ok after all the GA prepwork was finished, but I suppose I shouldn't be getting to ahead of myself. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 00:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

I personally don't mind if you are the nominator, but it's probably up to @Favre1fan93 and/or @Adamstom.97 as they're the top 2 contributors currently -- ZooBlazer 00:28, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Zoo. The question was addressed with everybody in mind, but yea. It's been a while since I've also looked at the article. I'll take another quick scan of the article and do some CE and see if there's anything that I think needs addressing. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 00:37, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

I appreciate everyone's enthusiasm and hard work, but I personally feel we have too many outstanding GA nominations that have not even been started to be adding another too. Beyond that, I also don't have the time/interest currently to return to this for GA nominations and won't plan to nominate it. Adam may feel differently, but I know they are currently less active. If the work gets done to make it all good to go for a nom, and then on to the next episode, then great. I just don't think we should be flooding GAN with more noms, when it says there are currently 534 waiting to be reviewed, three of which currently are MCU related. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:59, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

I'd argue we'd be helping out the TV section by adding more variety with all of those TV affiliates currently nominated

In all seriousness I'm fine with waiting a little bit more if necessary. Hopefully the February backlog drive actually happens. -- ZooBlazer 01:47, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

I know I have a backlog of ce-ing I'm working on at the moment, so I won't be getting to this one anytime soon, though it is on my radar. Trailblazer101 (talk) 02:06, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

No worries folks. There's no need to rush this. and I'm glad we're all putting this on our radar. This project has taken a while to get rolling so these are all very welcoming signs. I would love to hear from Adam soon but ofc understand that he may be busy IRL, and we won't GAN until we get his approval. Nevertheless, good luck on CEing and if you ever need assistance or help, I'm always here to lend a hand, to the best of my abillity. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 02:13, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

This has been on-and-off my radar and I have been less available for Wiki in general of late. I did some work on the main article recently and have some more work planned. If we aren't in a rush then I am happy to keep chipping away at this and come back to this thread in a bit. - adamstom97 (talk) 22:04, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

I think getting at least the first noms (first 2-3 episodes?) done next month if possible would be good because it seems like there will in fact be a backlog drive. Obviously if that doesn't work out, then it's not a big deal since there's no rush as has been mentioned already. -- ZooBlazer 22:11, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

@Adamstom.97 I'm glad to hear from you again. We're not in a rush, but I think we would like to get this done ahead of the Feb GA backlog as Zoo said. Our plan was to break it up into chunks, and @ZooBlazer I believe we decided on nomming the first 2 episodes, and the overall macro plan being that Zoo takes the odd numbered episodes while I take the even ones in terms of putting for the GANs, if that's all right with you? But either way, the two big outstanding items on the agenda now at this point is CE of the Ep 1 and Ep 2 really, and I think we should be in good shape for the GANs. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 01:41, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

@ZooBlazer @Adamstom.97 @Trailblazer101 @Favre1fan93 Pinging everyone who is interested. I just wanted to notify everyone that I have gone through and added content across all the episodes and that we're ready to proceed with the CE whenever you're ready for it. :) Dcdiehardfan (talk) 02:46, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Done, finally. Sorry it took me so long. - adamstom97 (talk) 05:06, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@Adamstom.97 I'm glad. I noticed that @Gonnym had recently being making some edits regarding WP:DUPLINK stuff in the Casting section. I believe that Adamstom is right in terms of delinking them since they've already been linked above and disagree it's WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS as it specifically is an MCU precedent, however again, I believe it warrants some discussion. I'd also like to refute the notion that Also, no one asked you to go and fix all the other articles now, just scroll above, we have always intended for Adam to do a comprehensive CE of the article prior to GAN, and other editors can also attest to that. -Dcdiehardfan (talk) 23:34, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Then you gave him more work then he clearly wants to. Gonnym (talk) 16:26, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

First of all, I didn't "give" him any work, as Adam affirmed his interest in helping CE the article. And second of all, if Adam doesn't want to, he can always relinquish the responsibility; this is purely a voluntary endeavor. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 18:50, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

There is no need to throw labels snd make assumptions. Remember, WP:AGF. Let’s keep this section focused on the GA prep, please. Trailblazer101 (talk) 19:13, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Casting section links

@Adamstom.97 and Gonnym: I'm starting this in order to prevent an edit war between you.

For those unaware, I think the issue boils down to whether cast members should be linked in the casting section for easy to find wikilinks for readers or if they should not be linked due to them already being linked in previous sections, so this could be a case of WP:DUPLINKS. -- ZooBlazer 16:00, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Just to bring up some insight, this was broadly discussed at the MCU taskforce talk regarding WP:DUPLINK now allowing linking of important/helpful terms for the first time in each section now, not simply for the first time it appears after the lead. The exact links provided for this can be found there, and this was primarily discussed as applying to the Phase links in the "Release" section. Trailblazer101 (talk) 17:11, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

FWIW, since that MCU task discussion, the wording at DUPLINK has been changed to ... the first occurrence in a major section (bolding mine). So I don't know if a "major" section would be defined as a just a level 2 heading (so only one in the first entire production section) or if level 3 headings count (then it could be linked in development, plus casting). - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:51, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Here's a new discussion at MOS:LINKING discussing this added wording/intent of DUPLINK. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:10, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

If there is consensus that the casting section is exempt from DUPLINK for actor and character articles then I have no problem with that, but that isn't what was done here. Gonnym was removing the links from the first instance in the production section which there has never been consensus for and we do not do for any other MCU article. It's bizarre that they started an edit war over this as if I was the one doing something out of ordinary. - adamstom97 (talk) 19:41, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Either you strike your comments or we can escalate this personal attack. Where in [10] did I [remove] the links from the first instance in the production section which there has never been consensus for and we do not do for any other MCU article.? Gonnym (talk) 16:39, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

In the hopes of preventing this from veering somewhere it ought not to, as this isn't something that needs to become uncivil (we all know we don't need that), so I would encourage all parties to cool down and keep a level head. At the end of the day, this comes down to WP:LOCALCONSENSUS on how to best link to relevant articles in these articles. Let's not get sidetracked and retain the discussion about the linking and the articles, please, not focusing on other editors. Trailblazer101 (talk) 16:53, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Apologies, I accidentally attributed a previous edit from another user to you Gonnym. - adamstom97 (talk) 20:14, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:New World Order (The Falcon and the Winter Soldier)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Dcdiehardfan (talk · contribs) 22:43, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Lazman321 (talk · contribs) 03:02, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

I'll take this one for the drive. Lazman321 (talk) 03:02, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

1 - Well written

1a - Clear and concise prose

• "...his five year absence." to "...his five-year absence."
• "...showing what they are each doing after Endgame." to "...showing their lives after Endgame."
• "...at Marvel Studios, to ensure it would..." to "...at Marvel Studios to ensure it would..."
• "...'some unknown white guy', and added that..." to "...'some unknown white guy' and added that..."
• "...James 'Rhodey' Rhodes who is the hero War Machine from the MCU films." to "...James 'Rhodey' Rhodes / War Machine."
• "...having a quiet moment together, and said there is an..." to "...having a quiet moment together and said there is an..."
• "...his friend Tony Stark / Iron Man and he is wondering why..." to "...his friend Tony Stark / Iron Man and is wondering why..."
• "...Skogland directing, and P.J. Dillon serving..." to "...Skogland directing and P.J. Dillon serving..."
• "...on unusual angles, with a wide lens." to "...on unusual angles with a wide lens."
• "...Pocket Cinema Camera 6K cameras which were small..." to "...Pocket Cinema Camera 6K cameras, which were small..."
• "...closer to the terrain which took advantage..." to "...closer to the terrain, taking advantage..."

Above are my notes for the prose. Lazman321 (talk) 15:51, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

 Done - adamstom97 (talk) 16:03, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

1b - Adherence to the Manual of Style

• MOS:LEAD - The lead appears to properly summarize the rest of the article. No action needed.
• MOS:LAYOUT - I recommend combining the release, marketing, and music sections into one, as they appear lackluster on their own, and information on marketing and release are usually grouped together. Also, break up the paragraphs in the production section when possible, as they are far too long to comfortably read. Finally, please rewrite the reception to group shared ideas between the reviews into different paragraphs, each with a topic sentence, rather than just having "A said, B said paragraphs. WP:RECEPTION can help.

 Comment: @Lazman312 I did a preliminary edit to try and trim things down and chunk it up. Let me know if it's better and what improvements need to be made. Y for the LAYOUT recommendation. -Dcdiehardfan (talk) 03:52, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Music and Marketing don't go in the Release section. I am open to discussing a better place for the music info since it is only one sentence, my suggestion would probably be to combine Visual effects and Music since they are both post-production related. - adamstom97 (talk) 08:49, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

I have reverted Dcdiehardfan's paragraph breaks in the production section, those paragraphs are not that big and putting a random break in the middle of them is certainly not an improvement. If you have a suggestion for a more logical break then that would be good to hear. - adamstom97 (talk) 08:50, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

The third paragraph of the filming section could have a paragraph break following "...and be used by the visual effects and post-production teams." The only paragraph of the visual effects section could have a paragraph break following "...that the sequence was 90 percent practical." Lazman321 (talk) 14:28, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Y on the para breaks Dcdiehardfan (talk) 03:06, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

• MOS:WTW - The closest I found regarding this guideline was that synonyms of said are used throughout the article, but I do feel the synonyms are appropriate given their context. No action needed.
• MOS:FICTION - The article is written from an real-world perspective with sources beyond the episode itself used to contextualize it. No action needed.
• MOS:LIST - Besides an appropriate table of awards, there are no lists. No action needed.

Here is my assessment of the required guidelines as per the criteria. MOS:LAYOUT is what you mainly want to address. Lazman321 (talk) 02:05, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

2 - Verifiable with no original research

2a - Identifiable list of references

There is indeed a list of references compliant with guidelines. ✓ Pass Lazman321 (talk) 03:04, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

2b - Reliable sources

There are some sources used that are marginally reliable like ComicBook.com or Screen Rant, but what they source is generally non-controversial, so I'm fine with their inclusion. However, I've never heard of the following sources and would like to know if they're considered reliable: Broadcast Beat, British Cinematographer, Art of VFX, befores & afters, and Film Music Reporter. Lazman321 (talk) 03:16, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

These are all accepted film/TV industry sources that focus on post-production, cinematography, visual effects, music, etc. - adamstom97 (talk) 08:22, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

I highly doubt that. None of them listed on WP:FILM/R or WP:RSP. Of these sources, I can only find discussion of Film Music Reporter on WP:RSN, with consensus being that it's generally unreliable. Do you have evidence that they are all accepted industry sources? Lazman321 (talk) 22:59, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

@Lazman321 Would the fact that those sources interview the actual members of the VFX production team factor into its reliability? The befores & afters and AWN source does indeed interview Charlie Tait, who is the VFX supervisor. I'll see if I can find alternate sources to replace the other content or address those changes. -Dcdiehardfan (talk) 00:32, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Just for clarification, AWN is considered a reliable source on WP:FILM/R and WP:ANIMATION/R, so it can be kept. I decided to look further into the sources myself to see what could be done about them. At a separate time, I feel each should be discussed on WP:RSN and WT:FILM to gain a consensus on their reliability, but here's my take for now.

• Broadcast Beat appears to be a press release site. It could potentially be kept as a primary source, but I'd recommend replacing with stronger sources.
• British Cinematographer appears to be a magazine endorsed by the British Society of Cinematographers, indicating strong connections to the industry. It can be kept.
• Art of VFX is a blog run by Vincent Frei, who does appear to be in the VFX industry, and what it supports is relatively basic. It can be kept.
• Befores and afters is another blog, this time run by Ian Frailes, who is a subject-matter expert on VFX. That does give credit to this being a genuine interview. It can be kept.
• Film Music Reporter is another blog. Unlike the prior two, it appears to be anonymous, and as such, has no credibility. Please remove it.

 Removed -Dcdiehardfan (talk) 03:52, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

In short, address Broadcast Beat and Film Music Reporter. Lazman321 (talk) 01:20, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

 Partly done Will work on Broadcast Beat later, but FMR should be removed. -Dcdiehardfan (talk) 03:52, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

I have replaced Broadcast Beat with the original press release. I have restored Film Music Reporter for now as I am not convinced that it needs to be removed. There is no consensus at WP:RS or WP:RS/PS that it is an unreliable source, despite some editors expressing concerns about it in these discussions: 1 2 3. It is widely used in film and television articles, including many where it has been accepted during a GA review, and it has never proven to be unreliable in the many years that I have been editing on Wikipedia. - adamstom97 (talk) 08:46, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Looking at those discussions, not a single contributor considers Film Music Reporter reliable, meaning the consensus is that it is clearly unreliable. That's because it is an anonymous self-published blog. As per WP:SPS, self-published sources are "largely not acceptable as sources" unless they are written by a subject-matter expert. Because Film Music Reporter is anonymous, whoever is writing it does not have the credentials to be a subject-matter expert. I don't care if other people have used it before. As per Wikipedia policy, it is not reliable. Lazman321 (talk) 14:18, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

We don't need to know who they are for them to be a subject-matter expert, the site is clearly a subject-matter expert when it comes to reporting on film score / soundtrack news. If there was an entry at WP:RS/PS explaining that it is not considered reliable then that would be one thing, but there is not. - adamstom97 (talk) 08:15, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

I have started a discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Film Music Reporter about this. - adamstom97 (talk) 09:52, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

I found a source you can replace Film Music Reporter with. [11] Lazman321 (talk) 15:31, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

I have made the switch for now. - adamstom97 (talk) 16:04, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

✓ Pass Lazman321 (talk) 16:24, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

2c - No original research

 Reviewing... Source check here. Lazman321 (talk) 03:19, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Finished. I noticed a few things that need addressed, but nothing too crazy. Lazman321 (talk) 00:27, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

I have addressed your concerns in the source check. - adamstom97 (talk) 09:26, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

✓ Pass Lazman321 (talk) 15:51, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

2d - No copyright violations

I didn't notice any plagiarism during my source check, and the quotes aren't too excessive. Earwig's Copyvio Detector marked copyright violations as being unlikely. ✓ Pass Lazman321 (talk) 02:09, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

3 - Broad in its coverage

3a - Main aspects

The article does cover all the main aspects of the episode; including its plot, production, release, and reception. ✓ Pass Lazman321 (talk) 02:20, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

3b - Focused

The reception section goes into some excessive detail in the reviews. This could be addressed alongside by concerns with the reception section under 1b. Otherwise, the article doesn't go off topic. Lazman321 (talk) 02:17, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

 Fixed Tried to trim it down a bit. I might later go onto add another review on that second paragraph since it's just the combined Agard and Holub EW review. -Dcdiehardfan (talk) 03:52, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

@Lazman321 any updates? DO you think my edits thus far is good or would you like more editing? -Dcdiehardfan (talk) 03:11, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

You know, I think it's fine for now. I do feel my requests regarding the reception section under this and criterion 1b were misinterpreted; I wanted a overhaul of the reception section to consolidate shared points of contentions between reviews into separate paragraphs (e.g. paragraph one is about opinions on characters, paragraph two is about opinions on story, etc.), similar to what WP:RECEPTION suggests. However, after some consideration, I realized I might've been imposing my own stylistic preferences as conditions beyond what the criteria requires, which goes against WP:RGA. As such, I will retract my requests regarding the reception section. ✓ Pass Lazman321 (talk) 03:43, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

4 - Neutral

None of the article including the production section feels promotional. The reception section could suffer WP:DUE problems due to it only focusing on a few reviews when a lot more could be used judging by the Rotten Tomatoes page. Obviously, not all 100+ reviews are reliable, but I did notice reliable reviews not used in the reception section. Lazman321 (talk) 02:32, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

If someone else doesn't get to it first, I can have a go at adding more reviews to the section later on. - adamstom97 (talk) 09:27, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

You know what, you don't have to add more reviews to the reception section. I won't make it a requirement. ✓ Pass Lazman321 (talk) 03:47, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

5 - Stable

This article hasn't been edited since September, so it's stable. ✓ Pass Lazman321 (talk) 01:33, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

6 - Illustrated by media

6a - Copyright tags

All images are appropriately tagged. ✓ Pass Lazman321 (talk) 01:28, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

6b - Relevant media

All images are relevant. One is a cover art, one is visualization of the production process, and one is of an actor who was nominated. ✓ Pass Lazman321 (talk) 01:29, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

7 - Verdict

@Dcdiehardfan: @Adamstom97: I will be placing this review  On hold for seven days. I will be holding off my assessment of the prose until after my other concerns have been addressed, particularly regarding the reception section. Feel free to ask me any questions. Lazman321 (talk) 02:34, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

@Adamstom.97: Sorry, that was the wrong ping Lazman321 (talk) 03:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Lazman321, just wanted to confirm, are we just waiting on the Film Music Reporter issue or is there anything else you were waiting for us to resolve that I am missing? - adamstom97 (talk) 09:23, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

For most part I guess. Just know I'm going to address criterion 1a promptly. Lazman321 (talk) 15:36, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for addressing my concerns.  Passed Lazman321 (talk) 16:25, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.