Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Naked Brothers Band: The Movie/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 not promoted by Steve 14:17, 3 July 2009 [1].

The Naked Brothers Band: The Movie

Nominator(s): ATC^{. Talk} 19:33, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It has been through many copyedits, and has received a WP:GAN. Now I think it fits the criteria as a featured article. ATC^{. Talk} 19:33, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quick comment I was just skimming the article, when I noticed this: "before their musical career went down the drain." This doesn't seem very encyclopedic wording. Artichoker^[talk] 19:47, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Reply: I fixed it to "...before their musical career became unsuccessful." Minor mistake. ATC^{. Talk} 22:07, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments -
What makes the following reliable sources?
Current ref 13 (Walsh-Boyle...) is lacking a last access date.
Per the MOS, link titles in the references shouldn't be in all capitals, even when they are in the original.
Please spell out abbreviations in the notes. Yes, they are linked, but you don't want your readers to leave your article, they might never return.

Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:04, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reply:
- I will fix MOS, but those sources are the only one available for the information. What do you do if their is no reliable sources, and non-reliable sources are present? Is it an exception?
- I will spell out the notes that are abbreviated.
- I'll check out the reference and see what I could do.
- Is there any other corrections that need to be done before it could be a featured article?
- Thanx!
- ATC^{. Talk} 15:40, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is no exception for unreliable sources, even if there are no reliable sources. Have you investigated print sources, such as magazines, newspapers? As far as your question about other corrections, I only review for sources and such like. Others will need to investigate the prose, images, etc, and it may take a bit of time. FAC can take up to a couple of weeks to run its course. (I just had one of my nominations promoted after two weeks at FAC, and there are others on the list right now that have been at FAC almost a month.) Ealdgyth - Talk 15:48, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is it okay for nominators who are away for a month? Because I will be away for eight weeks, starting July 6h through August, and I might not be on Wiki if and when it is accepted as a featured article. I'll leave a note on my user page, when I will be away so people know not to contact me, as I will not be available. ATC^{. Talk} 18:36, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, could you tell me where I abbreviated links (you are probably referring to abbreviation in the news sources/website ("publisher"))? I don't see anything, they all look like they are spelled out fully. Also, do you check if everything in the text of the article is sourced in the reference tag? Thanx! ATC^{. Talk} 18:43, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you're going to be away for 8 weeks in about a week, I would suggest withdrawing and nominating again when you return. The abbreviation is YTV, which actually links to a disambiguation page. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:32, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll fix that minor mistake and withdraw until I get back in August. ATC^{. Talk} 11:33, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand YTV redirects to YTV (TV channel)—not the disambiguation page. ATC^{. Talk} 11:36, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It does now, it did not when I checked yesterday, but all that matters is its fixed. It's still a good idea to not use abbreviations that aren't well known. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:27, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: Not much wrong, though I do have some issues; first off, there are several red links in "Filming." Unless you plan to make those articles, then they should be removed. Second, I know this isn't much an issues, but the cast is much a list. Some info on casting would be nice, as well as a larger expansion of the characters if they're going to be listed. Third, the releases section might need a bit expansion and minor clean up; it's still generally fine. Oh, and also, it'd be good to crop out the watermark in the plot images. On the topic of images, you might want to find some free use images for representative purposes. They help better understanding the area of topic. Other than those things, very nice job and if these are fixed I'd be happy to see this as an FA. The Flash ^{talk} 02:54, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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