Wikipedia:Featured article review/Sesame Street/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was removed by User:Marskell 10:57, 5 September 2008 [1].

Sesame Street

Review commentary

This was raised per concerns on IRC. Looking over the article, I notice very many problems which definitely make it far below FA class, especially given how much stricter FA has gotten since this was passed in '06:

Plenty of red links
"Funding" and "Characters" sections are almost entirely unsourced
{{Fact}} template in "Live characters" and "rumors and urban legends"
"Regional variations" also unsourced

Overall, I think these make it clear that this is no longer FA-class. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 21:44, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notified WikiProject Television and User:WordyGirl90. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 21:48, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Red links are not at opposition with featured status and are not a valid objection at FAR or FAR, unless they are, for example, to articles unlikely to meet notability. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:16, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. Some of them looked like they would stay red, though. Also, I removed a link that pointed to the wrong person; it was pointing to a Mad magazine contributor named George Woodbridge, who was not the same George Woodbridge involved with the show. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 23:39, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, this is no longer an FA class article. The vast majority of it is unsourced, with only a spattering of references in each section. The lead doesn't summarize the article well. The article doesn't follow the Television MoS well (sections out of order and all over the place), nor the Wikipedia MoS, with basic errors in heading names, organization, the infobox, etc. The characters and cast sections are very disorganized and messy looking. The list in regional variations seems unnecessary when it already has an entirely separate list, much less two. The "Rumors and urban legends" seems entirely unnecessary. Relevant content should be merged to other sections. The criticsm section shows a lack of neutrality as it is not part of an overall reception section, and the only other reception info given is a much briefer ratings section. Its awards are relegated to a see also without so much as a lead, and no corresponding positive reviews are given at all. The reference section includes unsourced commentary. For the actual references, I saw at least to references to the Muppet wiki and one to a personal Tripod website! Quite a few others are missing basic information and refer to log in only articles on EBSCOhost. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 22:03, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
~~Agree to delist~~ Delist - many unsourced facts and prose is kind of below FA standards. miranda 01:41, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Declarations to delist or keep aren't made in the review phase. Nousernamesleft (talk) 17:25, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Several issues in the article:

First paragraph in "Overview" needs to be better worded for prose flow.

Paragraph one and paragraph two are unsourced.

History of the show - one cite for the section. One external link.

"Rumors and Urban Legends" - OR?

"Featured Films" - unreferenced

If delisted, this article needs a B rating. miranda 20:37, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Images Are there too many fair-use images, especially considering that there are a couple of free ones in the article? DrKiernan (talk) 09:58, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FARC commentary

Suggested FA criteria concerns are referencing (1c) and prose (1a). Marskell (talk) 08:55, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delist, initial concerns unmet and little activity on the article beyond vandal control. No responses from any article contributers here either. Unlikely issues will be addressed. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 13:54, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delist as nominator. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 02:05, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per Collectonian. SchfiftyThree 02:07, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Definitely agree with Collectonian (talk · contribs). Cirt (talk) 21:47, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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