Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hawaii Five-0 (2010 TV series)/archive1

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 archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 06:01, 20 December 2017 [1].

Hawaii Five-0 (2010 TV series)

Nominator(s): TheDoctorWho (talk) 21:45, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the police procedural reboot Hawaii Five-0. The show features an elite state task force that solves extensive crimes on the island. This article has recently gone through extensive work to become a Good article and I believe that with hard work and determination I can help this become a featured article too. TheDoctorWho (talk) 21:45, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TheDoctor, welcome. Unfortunately I think this article is still well short of FA-ready, so I'm going to have to oppose at this point. Some examples of issues to address:

Given the length of the article, the lead should be considerably longer
I think a more comprehensive survey of the literature would help round out the article - for example, see here regarding economic impact to Hawaii
Suggest reorganizing the article to improve logical flow and reduce or eliminate very short subsections, like the one on the car (see also MOS:TV)
Citation formatting should be made more consistent
The cast photo needs a fuller FUR to justify why this particular image is key to reader understanding
There are stylistic issues throughout the article - for example, repeated links, misuse of italics. While I appreciate that you're wikilinking the acronyms in the Plot section, I think it would be more helpful to rewrite the section to avoid needing so many of them. Another example is the main cast section - you start out with a "Name. Short description." style, but midway through switch to a "Name, description" style. This should be consistent.
Some of the prose could use editing for clarity and flow. For example, in the lead: "originally an in-name-only unit of but folded into CBS Television Studios" - took me a couple of reads to understand what this meant, and the implication of "in-name-only" is still unclear to me. Another example is the first crossover desccription: "Joe White calls in Agent Kensi Blye from NCIS: Los Angeles Office to review the video of John McGarrett, Governor Jameson, and Wo Fat for Steve, but only recognizes the word "Shelburne"." - it's really unclear to me what this is intended to convey. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:30, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose from Aoba47

I will unfortunately have to agree with Nikkimaria on this; I just do not think that this is prepared for FAC. A peer review may be helpful for this though. I can see large portions of the article that are not cited at all, such as the "Premise" section and a majority of the "Broadcast and streaming" section, and that is a pretty big red flag for me. Aoba47 (talk) 03:12, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Coord note -- based on the above commentary, and my own spotcheck of the article overall, I concur that this well-intentioned nom is premature, so I'll be archiving it shortly; I hope the points above are taken on board, including the suggestion of a PR, and that we see the article back at FAC in due course. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:00, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 06:01, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.