Jump to content

Talk:William (The X-Files)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleWilliam (The X-Files) has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Good topic starWilliam (The X-Files) is part of the The X-Files (season 9) series, a good topic. It is also part of the Mythology of The X-Files, Volume 4 series, a good topic. These are identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve them, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 19, 2012Good article nomineeListed
September 8, 2012Good topic candidatePromoted
September 8, 2012Good topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:William (The X-Files)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: TBrandley (talk · contribs) 04:34, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Issues

[edit]

General

[edit]

Infobox

[edit]

Lede

[edit]
  • An episode can really "premiered" how about "originally aired". Thanks!
  • Unlink United States as the other countries not linked
  • In the lede, Fox network is linked, but in the "Reception" section, only Fox is linked. Please choose only one.
  • "The story for the episode was developed by former series star David Duchovny, series creator Chris Carter, and executive producer Frank Spotnitz; the teleplay was written by Carter. The episode was directed by Duchovny." A little messy. How about: The teleplay of the episode was written by Chris Carter, from a story by former series star David Duchovny, series creator Carter, and executive producer Frank Spotnitz
  • Could "The episode was directed by Duchovny. "William" be merge with the previous sentence
  • I know this might change everything else, but how about "The season centers on FBI special agents John Doggett (Robert Patrick), Monica Reyes (Annabeth Gish), and Dana Scully (Gillian Anderson)", rather than series. Because I see other articles that say it centers on Mulder and Scully
  • "Chris Owens was asked to return to the series for the episode. Owens' character had previously been killed off in the sixth season episode "One Son". How about: "Chris Owens was asked to return to the series for the episode, whose character had previously been killed off in the sixth season episode "One Son"

Plot

[edit]

Production

[edit]

Broadcast and reception

[edit]

Notes

[edit]
  • No issues in such a small section.
    • Good work!

References

[edit]
[edit]

After these are fixed, I'd still recommend a copy-edit for the article, particularly in the "Plot" and "Reception" sections. Other than that, great work! TBrandley 05:25, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I went through and cleaned up the prose. Honestly, I don't see very many grammar errors though, so I don't think a full ce is necessary, but I could probably get Grapple to look it over if he has time. In the meantime, I've combed through it.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 17:12, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Maybe just a quick look. Thanks, TBrandley 17:13, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK, Grapple X has given it a copyedit and I've cut down on some of it. It should be good to go.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 15:37, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hatnote

[edit]

I have no desire to start a hatnote edit war on this page. If you disagree with my changes, please feel free to further edit/revert them, but please let's discuss them here as well from now on, to try and reach consensus. My rational for the changes is as follows:

  • In my view, mentioning that Baby William is a character in The X-Files is important as this establishes the context for why the footnote is relevant both to the article and potentially to the reader. This is why I added it.
  • My original edit ("For the X-Files character...") did not capitalise "The" because this made a straightforward and simple, grammatically coherent hatnote. I did not think it critical to retain the "The" in italics and capitalised, as although normally a show's official name either does or does not include a capitalised article, typically in usage there is no hard-and-fast rule. In that sentence construct, the "the" with lowercase is required for grammar; it does not form part of the title of the show and thus should not be capitalised. If a capitalised "The" is required, the correct form would be "For the The X-Files character..."; the non-capitalised "the" belongs with the word "character", not with "X-files", which is adjectival in this context. I have changes the sentence grammar to allow a capitalised "The" without undue awkwardness. I hope this is acceptable. (This does not prove that it is correct, but my first chosen form exists independently elsewhere on Wikipedia, e.g. the hatnote at Help! (album); I contend that in this context, it is acceptable and even correct not to capitalise the "the".)
  • "The X-Files" is the name of a series and thus should be italicised per MOS:ITALICS. In an italicised context, words or phrases that are normally italicised are transposed again into the regular font. This is what should be done here, and I have reinstated it.

I do not claim to be infallible in these regards, and as said above, am ready to have a debate to attempt to reach consensus. Please participate if you disagree at all. Thank you

--MegaSloth (talk) 16:32, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd just note that a link to List of minor The X-Files characters would be better as there are at least four characters in the series named "William". In terms of italics and definite articles, what you have at the minute is fine. GRAPPLE X 16:37, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comments. I took a quick look and the other three Williams – besides going by the name Bill or Billy – appear to have well-established surnames, which I think means that MOS:DABSUR applies and they do not need disambiguating? --MegaSloth (talk) 19:13, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say to be safe, go for it. Max (The X-Files) has a hatnote pointing to Max Fenig, after all. I think if we're going to stick a hat note to aid navigation we might want to go the whole hog. How about "For the titular character, see Baby William; for other characters in the series named William, see list of minor The X-Files characters"? GRAPPLE X 19:19, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well we're going off the original topic, but as that appears to be settled I'm happy to run with it. I'm afraid I would disagree. I would say that disambiguating Max Fenig from Max, even in the context of The X-Files, was technically incorrect unless there is some compelling WP:IAR-type reason to vary from the guidelines. I'm not sufficiently familiar with the X-files to comment on the Max/Max Fenig case so I won't pursue that, but it is clear to me that the other Williams, if they were to be referred to by a single name, would in any case be "Bill" or "Billy". This is in addition to MOS:DABSUR which clearly states "Persons who have the ambiguous term as surname or given name should not be in the same section of the disambiguation page as the other links unless they are very frequently referred to simply by the single name (e.g., Elvis, Shakespeare)" (this is talking about DAB pages but there is no reason to use different criteria for DAB hatnotes). Disambiguating the Bill(y)s from other uses of "William" alone would be both against the disambiguation guidelines and counterproductive. --MegaSloth (talk) 19:43, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough for this one; though the Max/Max Fenig case makes sense as Max Fenig is a character not only from the series but from that episode itself, I can easily see a reader searching "Max (The X-Files)" and reasonably expecting to see the character (like, for example, searching for "Hamlet" and wanting to see Prince Hamlet rather than The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark). GRAPPLE X 19:49, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad we can agree on the hatnote for this page. While I'm not completely convinced regarding Max Fenig, your arguments make some sense. I'm not sure your example of Hamlet is a good one; Prince is a title not a first name and to my knowledge Hamlet is given no other name, so there is no choice but to disambiguate him from other "Hamlet"s. Nonetheless, I am content that the hatnote at Max (The X-Files) is at worst harmless and is possibly useful so there's no point spending our energies debating further. Many thanks for spending the time to sort this one out. --MegaSloth (talk) 17:37, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on William (The X-Files). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:49, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:William_(The_X-Files)&oldid=1206047873"