Talk:The Texas Chain Saw Massacre/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

FA?

This article has come to a virtual standstill. I can't think of anything more to add to it. But it could use a copyedit, then perhaps it will be one step closer to becoming FA-class. Is there anybody else willing to help in it's goal towards FA standard? It's come a long way since I first started editing it in June 2008. --The Taerkasten (talk) 15:02, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Hey, yeah I'm certainly interested. Ashton 29 (talk) 04:21, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

That's good to hear. I think it's possible for this to be FA before the end of the year, hopefully. In terms of content, I'm not sure if there's anything else that could be added, but there could be. I don't have much time at the moment, but I hope to work on this again, and then the rest of the Chainsaw articles, which aren't in great shape. If we do add anything, and source it, we've established the use of {{cite web}} and other citation templates for the sources. I've also requested a copyedit at the WP:GoCE, but it's not getting much response and WP:HORROR is essentially dead. I guess we'll just have to see where this article goes. --The Taerkasten (talk) 19:56, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, maybe an image or two to illustrate the article might help. Otherwise I think it just needs that copyedit which we will have to keep waiting for. Ashton 29 (talk) 05:48, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

If we do add any images, we must make sure they follow guideline on non-free images, since it's unlikely that any free images can be used.--The Taerkasten (talk) 22:18, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Copy edit

I have just completed a full copy edit of this article. I understand that this article will be proposed for FA. Here are some issues that have to be resolved:

• There are some incorrect use of wikilinking. Wikilinks should, 1) Be made only on the first mention, and, 2) Only be linked once (do not repeat further down). This is a requirement of almost all FA reviews that I have seen. If someone who likes to do wikifying and/or cleanup can have a look at this, that would be great.
• I also have some issues with % and percent. They are both used in the article. Which do you prefer? It needs to be consistent.

Cheers -- S Masters (talk) 10:51, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Road to FA

Once or if the peer review is complete, I will go over any of the comments made, improve where necessary, then nominate it for FA. If the peer review does not get completed, I will nominate it for FA, anyway, although that is not ideal. Is there any editors willing to lend a hand in promoting this article to FA? --The Taerkasten (talk) 20:54, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I know you have worked really hard on this. I hope an editor experienced with FA can do the PR first. Let me know if there's anything I can do to help. -- S Masters (talk) 03:54, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, will do. I'm just worried about vandalism as I will be leaving shortly for a few days.--The Taerkasten (talk) 09:37, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Don't worry about it! :) Vandalism can be undone. In any case, I will put this article on my watchlist if that reassures you. Erik (talk | contribs) 11:44, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Final step towards FA

If anyone's interested in helping, now is the time to say something. I will be taking this article to FA really soon, and hope this time round it'll pass. I don't intend to let the fourth FA fail, and help will be appreciated. --The Taerkasten (talk) 15:52, 7 July 2010 (UTC)