Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Solid Snake/archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 not promoted 16:20, 3 August 2007.
Meets the requirements for a featured article. - Addit 21:41, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose. The writing is not featured quality, there are not enough sources, and too much of the article is in-universe- there is very little dedicated to the creation and evolution of the article. The references being used are unclear. Example: the article points out that Snake resembles Mel Gibson, but the source is just the DVD- is this just an arbitrary comparison? Did the artists intend for this to happen? Is this original research? The prose seems very jumpy, clumsily moving from topic to topic.-Wafulz 16:47, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think this is quite FA quality, myself, having written the bulk of it, but some of your criticisms are a bit unclear.
- The article is in chronological order, since much of the story is told as a flashback, often retconning previous stories. The entire article is about the creation and development of the character.
- The comparison of Solid Snake to Mel Gibson and Michael Biehn is made on the "making-of" DVD, and is passive. It isn't stated that Solid Snake was intended to look like these characters, but the strong assertion (that Snake is based on contemporary action heroes of the time) is made.
- How would you suggest rearranging it? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:22, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think this is quite FA quality, myself, having written the bulk of it, but some of your criticisms are a bit unclear.
- Chronologically arranged fictional subjects are difficult to follow. The real world content should be separated, and the fictional content arranged into a plot-like section.
- There should be a section on character development. The inspiration behind the character, the creators' intents (is he a badass? Comical? Epic hero?), any voice acting and casting
- A section with "appearances" could be created, with subsections for each major game, and a subsection for "other appearances" for cameos or minor roles (ie, Smash Bros)
- If possible, something like influences, popularity, or notable parody.
- The problem with mixing plot and real-world material is that it's very hard to find information on the character if you're not familiar with each game.-Wafulz 13:37, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Chronologically arranged fictional subjects are difficult to follow. The real world content should be separated, and the fictional content arranged into a plot-like section.
- Weak oppose. Five copyrighted images can never constitute fair use, especially not for an article of this length. Whilst I appreciate you have taken the time to explain the rationale on the image pages, and that no free images are available, this does not automatically make an image fair use. In particular the one of him in a box has the rationale "Used to identify the subject in question", and should be removed. Ideally this and one other image should be removed; making the article look pretty is not sufficient justification for fair use. In addition the inclusion of an image below the infobox has resulted in a large unattractive gap.
- Other points of contention are the length of the infobox and the fact that the MGS3 plot is described despite Snake not actually being in the game. I would suggest something along the lines of
- "Snake did not feature in Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater, aside from a role in the Snake Vs Monkey minigame, a reworking of Ape Escape. However, the upcoming PS3 game Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots will once again feature Snake as the protagonist."
- I appreciate that this is a long list for a "weak oppose" but I feel it's more useful to you that I give a detailed account of why I haven't supported. I would consider changing my vote if these things are addressed. BeL1EveR 13:49, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose This needs far more sourcing- huge swaths of the article are completely uncited. I'd also echo the above concerns about lack of information on the creation/development of such an important character and the number of fair-use images. -- Kicking222 15:42, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. 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.