Misplaced Pages

:Featured article candidates/Dan Povenmire/archive1: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 18:35, 22 November 2009 editSuperFlash101 (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers5,019 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit Revision as of 18:52, 22 November 2009 edit undoSandyGeorgia (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, File movers, Mass message senders, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors278,963 edits restartNext edit →
Line 17: Line 17:
* '''Comment:''' citation style is consistent. ] (]) 00:41, 28 October 2009 (UTC) * '''Comment:''' citation style is consistent. ] (]) 00:41, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


::: '''Restart''', . Citations are not consistent or correct (inconsistent date formats and incorrect use of italics), and it's not clear to me that sourcing concerns have been addressed. '''Images and alt text''' reviewed. ] (]) 18:52, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
*Why doesn't this article have any image of the person it describes? ] (]) 02:12, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
**Because there's absolutely zero freeuse images of him out there. And as per policy, fairuse images of living people is no allowed. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 02:53, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

*As i said in the GAR can you make larger the personal life section, or merge it to another section?.--] <sup>]</sup> 21:35, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
**Sorry, but there's no other info on his personal life out there. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:39, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
***Actually, to better word that, there ''is'' other personal info about him out there, but none of it truly meets ]. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:49, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I see and as well as his age man this man co created an emmy winning cartoon and no one nows hjis age.--] <sup>]</sup> 21:51, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
*So, Pedro, do you support the article's nomination? I just don't want this nomination to fail because of lack of generally comments and/or supports. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 03:06, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

*'''Support''': Well my thoughts abot the artical are not done yet but many of them the info is not avallable, so i will supporrts this artical.--] <sup>]</sup> 12:31, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

'''Comments''', feel free to not fix at your discretion
*Can ref 19 (IMDB) be replaced? IMDB isn't high-quality.
**<s>I looked everywhere, as I really didn't want to resort to IMDb, but the search was in vein - I'll try Infoplease, see if it's there. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 15:23, 31 October 2009 (UTC)</s>
***Yeah, I looked again, I can't find any other source. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 15:30, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
*I guess there are no free images available.
**Nope, unfortunately. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 15:23, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
***Have you tried requesting permission for images on Flickr? There's three images that the uploader may be willing to relicense. ''']'''<sup>]</sup> 19:36, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
****I do not currently have a Flickr account so am unable to contact any of its users. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
****Ok no problem. I've sent the uploader a message for you. ''']'''<sup>]</sup> 22:30, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
**Thank you! That is warmly appreciated! ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 23:04, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
*"he had displayed work" to "his work was displayed"; he didn't display his work, the art shows did.
**done ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 15:23, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
*"first popular comic strip: a series, "Life is a Fish", devoted to", I would take out the colon (a comma suffices) and "a series" (what else would it be?).
**done ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 15:23, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
*"including t-shirts, books, and calendars sold" I realize it would look odd to have only "book" unlinked, but it is a common term.
**done ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 15:23, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
] (]) 13:51, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

* '''Comments''' -
* What makes the following reliable sources?
** http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9ZEF33WPp4 & http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9ZEF33WPp4 (Yes, I see the above, but that doesn't tell me why this is reliable...)
*** and I can actually get the official website's versions of the videos if you don't think YouTube is a sufficient site. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
**** I'm sorry, but a 7 year old's internet interview site is just not going to cut it as a reliable source. ] - ] 00:15, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
*****The fact that she's seven mean's diddly squat. Those two articles I linked '''confirm it as a reliable source,''' that's all that it needs. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 00:25, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
::::::::Ealdgyth is correct. The newspaper simply proves that the show is wellknown, not that it is a reliable source. Otherwise the Hamas Mouse counts as a RS, or a guy who won a school science competition is on a par with academics ''']''' ('']''</font>) (] 23:49, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
:::Removed. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 00:28, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
****Oh, and that NYT link was the wrong one - see for the alternate. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 00:29, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
** http://blog.al.com/entertainment-press-register/2008/05/disney_animator_sees_summers_i.html (You say above it's a "press site" but how so? And what makes it reliable? Is it affiliated with newspapers or a news agency?)
***, specifically looking at article from ] and from ]. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
** http://www.classmates.com/directory/public/memberprofile/list.htm?regId=8691491442
***] - check out . ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
** http://www.hopstudios.com/dtlink/listP.html (again, just because it funds a college newspaper, doesn't make it reliable.)
***As the website is affiliated with the ''],'' a reliable newspaper publication, I believe it passes ]. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
** <s>http://www.californiachronicle.com/articles/yb/136406123 (Is this an online version of a printed newspaper?)</s>
***Yep - . ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
: Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. ] - ] 16:24, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
:: To determine the reliability of the site, we need to know what sort of fact checking they do. You can establish this by showing news articles that say the site is reliable/noteworthy/etc. or you can show a page on the site that gives their rules for submissions/etc. or you can show they are backed by a media company/university/institute, or you can show that the website gives its sources and methods, or there are some other ways that would work too. It's their reputation for reliability that needs to be demonstrated. Please see ] for further detailed information. (Sorry for the delay, I've been sick. ) ] - ] 23:53, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
:::Uh...I already did that for each, see above. Most of them I linked to Google News searches which show reliable sources citing the websites as credible sources. What are you referring to, then? ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 00:01, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
:::: And I wasn't very convinced, but I'll leave this out for other reviewers to decide for themselves. I lean unreliable still, though. ] - ] 00:15, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
::Seriously, though? The websites I linked to back them up were all reliable, what makes you still lean against them? The rules state that a reliable source can be backed up by other reliable sources which confirm it as noteworthy or reliable — I linked you to articles that proved it. I do not understand what makes you still disbelieve in them. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 00:25, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
'''Image review''' - <s>] - Please add a description of this image to the image description page. Thanks! ] (]) 05:27, 6 November 2009 (UTC)</s>
*Done. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:09, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
**Thanks! ] (]) 02:53, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
*'''Support''' - excellent work with prose. ''']'''] 18:15, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
**Thanks — that's the mainly work of the article's copyeditor, ]. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 19:08, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
*<s>''As a child Povenmire enjoyed the Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck Looney Tunes cartoons, considering animator Chuck Jones a hero; Povenmire felt that "Every drawing he did was beautiful to look at and had so much energy in it." '' - you switch from enjoyed to considering to felt. Stay in one tense</s>
**Done. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 19:07, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
*<s>''An 2004 email exchange about the website between Stone and Povenmire resulted in a "clever and twisted" series of comic strips drawn by the two, eventually moved to the website Badmouth.''</s>
**Assuming you're referring to the "an" in front of "2004," done. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 19:07, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
* '''Comments'''
:* "Povenmire's mother encouraged..." Difficult for me to fathom why this paragraph is included in the text... aside from the fact that it appears in the very-oft-quoted
::*This was a key moment in his life supported by multiple sources. This led to the creation of his show, Phineas and Ferb. It's important. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 14:48, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
:* Classmates.com? Difficult for me to see how that's a reliable source. Maybe. I suppose. ] (]) 09:43, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
::*I can remove it if you wish. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 14:48, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
:::*'''Comment''': 1. The first sentence say he is "American". Can you be specific and say that he is from the United States, or else link the adjective "American" to United States.
::::Changed link to United States. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 19:39, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
:::2. The article lacks the most basic biographical details. The first paragraph in the body of the article should say:''Dan Povenmire was born on (date) at (town and country), the son of (Who?) and (Who?).'' ] (]) 08:56, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
::::Not true, none of that information exists. There's no source anywhere for it, not all articles have to say that, there is no rule for it in any guideline I've read. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 19:39, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
:::::Of course the information ''exists''! You need to do more research. If you are serious about this, that is, if you want this to be an FA quality biography, then you track down the essential details. Drop an email to his agent. It is quite easy to find out this sort of stuff if you use some initiative.
:::::Dan Provenmire was 44 years old in May 2008. Note, this does not imply that he ''turned'' 44 in May 2008. ] (]) 05:25, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
::::::He attended Shaw High School, Mobile 1977-1981. ] (]) 06:01, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
:::Please do not tell me that I have not done enough research. Every available source is already in the article, including ''both'' of the sources you just listed. Those sources merely give rough estimates; again, the information exists, but there is not website or book that tells us his age/birthday, and it is not even necessary for it to be in the article. Plus, e-mails do not even skim ], as it is merely a form of ] (trust me, I tried using an e-mail correspondence a wiki did with him, it was shot down immediately). Still, if you can find an RS for his birthday (which I really doubt exists) then that'd be appreciated. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 06:26, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

* '''Reliable sources''': will the two supported editors please comment specifically on the oustanding concerns here about reliability of sources. ] (]) 21:05, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

*To be honest i can't tell a thing that is wrong with the sources sandy., we have been in his postion there are not as much sources as we need or not to reliable but thats all we got and flash has done a great job with this artical--] <sup>]</sup> 22:05, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

'''Auntieruth55 review'''
This was an intriguing article to read, not being familiar with the culture of animated series. I can appreciate that there are difficulties in creating such an article, based on a living person who may be a bit secretive, is still fairly young, etc etc. So, within that context, this article is well done, given the limited number of sources.

That said, however, I have to <s>'''OPPOSE'''</s> '''Conditional Support''' (see the end of the section) for the following reasons:
;Crit. 1: Prose
*The prose is actually "pretty good" but it is not very good. It is difficult to read, and many sentences contain extraneous information that makes them confusing to follow. The information is sometimes out of sequence.

<s>:*{{xt|He was a longtime director on the prime time series Family Guy, where he was nominated for an Annie Award, until he left to create Phineas and Ferb with Jeff "Swampy" Marsh.}} Presumably he did not lose his nomination because he left to create P and F. Should be/could be....He was a long time director on the prime time series Family Guy, and his work received an Annie nomination in (date). He left Family Guy to create Phineas and Ferb with Jeff Marsh. Povenmire has been nominated for a BAFTA, an Annie, and two E</s>mmys. He is currently married and lives in Pasadena California.
::*Done. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

<s>:*There are many other sentences like that one. {{xt|At USC, he pitched Life is a Fish immediately to Mark Ordesky, the then editor-in-chief of college newspaper the Daily Trojan}} Problems:</s> (1) immediately? Immediately upon his enrollment? Immediately when he thought of it? (2) it is not a college newspaper, it is a university newspaper. (3) missing an article, and has an extra article; (4) At USC, he pitched Life is a Fish to ], then editor-in-chief of the university's student newspaper, ''The Daily Trojan''.
::*(1)The source is unclear. It says that he "immediately pitched the idea to Ordesky." (2) Done. (3) What? (4) Again, what? ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
:::* (1) It is your job to make sense of the sources. If they are unclear, then leave ''out'' immediately.
:::*(3)an article, like ''the'' or ''a'' or ''an''. I fixed it.
:::*(4) the then editor in chief is confusing. Should be either then editor in chief, or then the editor in chief. Fixed. ] (]) 23:06, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
::::*(1) Cleared it up. (3) I figured that's what you were referring to, I just wasn't sure where you wanted me to fix it, lol. (4) Cleared it up a bit without realizing you did so — still works? ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 02:31, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
<s>:*.... without gaining a degree. Huh? He dropped out of USC before finishing the degree requirements, or he left without graduating.</s>
::*Again, source just says that he dropped out without a degree. Most likely referring to not graduating. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
:::*If someone drops out with out getting a degree...it means they didn't finish the degree requirements before they left. Dropping out is slang. without gaining a degree is convoluted. ] (]) 23:06, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

<s>:*{{xt|There he sat opposite Jeffery Marsh, later to become a colleague on several projects, with whom he bonded over shared tastes in humor and music.}} Huh? (1) He sat opposite Jeffery Marsh? What does that mean? (2) Combining two time frames in one sentence places everything out of sequence. His desk placed him opposite Jeffery Marsh, another up-and-coming animator (or whatever he was). Their shared tastes in humor and music, and later became colleagues on other projects.</s>
::*(1) Uh...exactly what it said. He ''sat opposite from him.'' He sat down across from him. (2) I think I've fixed it. Done? ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:32, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
<s>:* child hood experiences of summers outdoors.....HUH? Based on their similar experiences of childhood summers spent outdoors or something....</s>
::*Done. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

<s>*Repetitiveness. Povenmire did this, Povenmire did that. Mix it up. The pair developed, the pair did, the pair, created. Same.</s>
:*How ''else'' do you want me to word this? I can't just say "The man went to blah blah blah," it's his name. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
::*Fixed. Throughout. ] (]) 23:06, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
:::*Thank you. :) ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 02:23, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
<s>* And other instances like these (repetitiveness, problems of clarity, ambiguity in sentence structure, wording, timing, etc.).</s>
:*''Like....'' ? Specifically, please. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
::*fixed throughout. You need to learn to read your own text more critically. :) This comes with time for some, and for some it comes sometime, and for others, they never develop the ability. No problem. The article is short. ] (]) 23:06, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
:::*Once more, thanks. :) ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 02:23, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
* <s>I would omit the information on the children entirely.</s> <s>Mention they have two children. Leave out the info on them. Not relevant.</s>
:*I do not agree. It's his children, it's not like it's useless. If there's a policy, I'll change it, but I strongly disagree with you here entirely. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
::*I just think it's a bad policy to include their names, and such detail. At the most, mention that he has two daughters. Not birthdays. Too many weirdos out there. I have left a request at the Biography Wikiproject for policy on this. Since this is a LPB we should err on the side of caution. ] (]) 23:06, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
:::*Agreed. I've removed their names and dates, but I kept in the bit about a character in ''Phineas'' being named after one of them. Is that okay? ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 02:23, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
::::*yes, much better. I wouldn't want my kids named in something that their co-kids could find. ] (]) 22:07, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
*Reference section does not include all your references. Where are the newspapers and other sources you have used?
:*You're completely misunderstanding the point in it then. The ''notes'' are the refs, the "References" section is for books cited. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
:::*you didn't include the books in the citations section? I see them in the footnotes list, but I don't see the newspapers etc. in the references list. And Flash, I'm smarter than the average bear, and if I don't understand your rationale, there will be others in the same boat. ] (]) 23:08, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
::::*I'm basing it on articles like ] and ]. As you can see there, they list books under "References," then make a "Notes" sections which contain specific refs to the claims; books are then simply put as the author and page and linked to the title of the book which is mentioned in "References." I could just as easily change it to "Further reading" if you'd like. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 02:23, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
<s>:Re the question of quality and reliability. I echo the suggestion of contacting his agent. Surely his agent will provide you with high quality reliable information about the man. Did you try searching the New York Times, or some other reliable newspaper, rather than relying on the info provided in IMDB?</s>
:*I don't think you read what I said carefully enough. The ''sole'' reason I'm using IMDb is because there's ''no'' other source for it I can find; the award's official website does not contain info from 1996. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

*Citations: (not sure this is actionable.

:*fn4, which you cite many times, has a link to a page that doesn’t exist. Error 404 page not found. Search for Povenmire returns 0 results.
::*I do not know why the archives are not working. Any idea? ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
:*fn5 abc, links to Greenspon, which circles back to this article. fn 13 also. fn15 Neuwirth (and Callaghan 21-27) also links back to the article, not to the source, so why is it blue-linked?
::*So you know what "Greenspon" is - there's nothing wrong with it, it's a common structure for articles (and, no, I do not believe that claim falls under ].) ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
:::*It doesn't link to Greenspon, it links only to the article generally. I question that you need the link at all. What is the policy on this, someone?
::::*See above, please. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 02:23, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
:::::* and....I don't understand why it is linked. Still. ] (]) 22:07, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
::::::*Okay — it links and highlights the book its referring to, which is spelled out with publisher, etc., info in the section, so that people know what its for. It links to a section on the page which shows the cite book info and therefore explains to you what "Greenspon" is. Is it clear now? ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 01:08, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
:*fn34 Comic Strip War should be capitalized.
::*The article titles it like that, uncapitalized. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
:::*then put after the title to indicate that you know it should be capitalized, but this is the way it was done. ] (]) 23:06, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
::::*Won't that screw up the link, however? ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 02:23, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
::::*I have no idea. Make the link shorter, put the "sic" outside the link, or in the name of it.
It looks like you were careless and didn't capitalize, not that it was "poetic" license on the part of the editors of the magazine. ] (]) 22:07, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
:::::*That is not true — did you check out the article? The title is ''not'' capitalized, I wasn't being lazy, I put the title of the page as it was on the page. I've capitalized it nonetheless. :) ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 01:08, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
;criterion 4: Images

*alt text needs work. For example:

*A Caucasian man dressed in a black shirt sits, smiling, with a microphone in front of him. His arms are crossed and his hair and goatee is black. A table is viewable in front of him, while repeating square symbols with an eyeball on them can be seen behind him. Repeating square symbols? Square signs are posted on the wall behind him, bearing the name COMIC-CON in big bright yellow letters around a drawn eye and eyebrow...
:*Done. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
*Several tall buildings rest on water????? HUH? This needs a better description entirely! We also don't know it is an ocean. How do we know that? How can we tell that from looking at it?
:*Done. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
:Tommy Chong is a ''tanned'' man, not a tan man. Or a well-tanned man with white hair and a white beard holds a microphone in front of his face. On his left wrist, he wears a heavy silver-colored watch; with his right hand, he is gesturing. On the wall behind him are two signs: one bears the name "Tommy Chong".
:*Done. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

:{{xt|A Caucasian male with black hair and stubble, along with a black shirt. His hand is placed under his chin and a microphone is in front of him. A vague symbol is marked behind him.}} A Caucasian male with black hair and facial stubble, wearing a black shirt, sits at a table. His chin rests on his hand, and he has a slight, bemused smile on his face. A blurred sign behind him has yellow lettering.
:*Done. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
<s>I suggest another copy edit, or a similar type of review. I'd also look at some other kinds of sources to see what you can find. I'm not saying it isn't well researched (you're a bit touchy about that), I'm saying you could be more thorough. This man is regularly in the news, so there must be info out there in newspapers and online magazines. For example, . Did you look at his Facebook page? Time. Newsweek. etc. ] (]) 22:39, 15 November 2009 (UTC)</s>
:*I don't see at all how ] even ''skims'' ] standards. I'm only using reliable sources, which is why info like his age and such is unavailable. All the info that there ''is'' out there is in here. Besides, nothing in that article (which I've already read thoroughly while working on previous articles) contains any useful stuff about Dan that isn't supported by other sources. Thank you for your comments; ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
::* it has a decent picture of him.] (]) 23:06, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
:::*Still, I don't think another image of him is needed, especially a fairuse one. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 02:23, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
::::*At some point there was discussion about ''not'' finding an image of him. Just pointing out that there was one. ] (]) 22:07, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
*'''Alt texts''': What are they about? They are for people who cannot see the images, particularly blind people. The important points to remember are
# They are read before the main caption, so need to contain the name of the person in order to make sense. "man in a black suit" could be describing (for example) an author, a character from the author's book, or a critic who commented on his work. You can't leave the listener in suspense.
:#"leave the listener in suspense"? It is not necessary to say ''who'' the man in the picture is, as it is very likely the blind reader/listener has ever heard of the person or knows what they look like. That is the point in the ALTTEXT, no? To describe what's in the picture, not tell who he is. How is saying "an animator" or "an American cartoonist" going to clear it up? You see what I mean? ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
# What sort of image is it? A formal portrait, a publicity shot, a snapshot, a news image, a paprazzi shot?
:#Does snapshot work for all of them? ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
# Unless you are describing the composition of an artwork, the position, like "facing right" is unimportant. "Hand held up on a level with the mouth" tells a blind person nothing. Try to capture a sense of what the person is involved in and what their expression tells you. You have more interpretative freedom here than in the body of the article.
:#How do you want me to fix this? ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
# Don't give your blind listener a little game of identification. If it is perfectly clear that the logo on the wall is the "Comic Con" logo, then state that Provenmire is at "Comic Con International". Describing a number of square signs on the wall is utterly meaningless and confusing.
:#Yeah, done. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
# Remember that many/most blind listeners have either once been sighted or have some sight, but not enough to read. ] (]) 06:03, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
:#Thanks for the advice. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

::I was told that the alt text should not include the name of the person, because it needs to be identifiable by a non-expert. I will ask for clarification on this on the talk page. Regardless, the alt-text needs work. ] (]) 17:32, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
:::I agree with Auntieruth. Like I said, I don't see any point as to how saying things like "Dan Povenmire" or "a cartoonist" could help the reader understand the picture. Also, I've tried my best to clear up the ALT text, tell me what you think. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

'''<s>Conditional</s> Support'''. ] (]) 22:41, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
:(1)Prose: The prose issues were fixed by the editor, or I fixed them. It's not stellar, but it's presentable.<br>
:(2) Refs: (a) Question about the way references and citations are presented. The "Reference" section only includes books, and I don't understand the rationale for not including everything (not sure this is actionable). This makes the citing and sources look incomplete to me (again, actionable? not sure). (b) several ref links lead no where. Is this a problem? Someone else needs to take a look. <br>
::I explained a while up about the References. Also, I'm unsure how to fix the archives, for some reason they're redirecting (IDK why). ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 02:23, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
:(3) <s> I don't think the children should be listed by name, and certainly not with a birthday. I've left a request at the WP Bio for an explanation of policy on this.</s><br>
::Removed their names, see above. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 02:23, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

'''Children's names:''' Flash, I'm glad you've removed them. For future reference, here is the policy. ] ] (]) 20:38, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

:(4) alt images need someone with some greater experience than I to take a look.
Flash, nice work. I like an article that I can learn from! ] (]) 23:06, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
:Thanks! After all, that's what Misplaced Pages's for. :) ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 02:23, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

'''Notes''' (] (]))
*<s>... "every drawing he did was beautiful to look at and had so much energy in it." Shouldn't the ellipses be inside the quotation marks?</s>
:*Right you are. Done. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:06, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
*<s>"text books" Is it really two words? Just wondering (not a loaded question); I've always seen it as one.</s>
:*I generally see it in two words. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:06, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
*<s>A bit of overlinking of common and easily understandable terms, such as "summer vacation", "treehouse", "t-shirt", "calendar", "college degree", "triangle" (!) etc. Please check throughout.</s>
:*Done. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:06, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
:::I did a few more of the overlinks. ] (]) 02:00, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
*<s>Alt text: "Snapshot of Tommy Chong" I'm not an expert (that would be Eubulides), but alt text isn't supposed to have phrases about the composition of the photo (e.g. "Snapshot") or proper nouns (e.g. names).</s>
:*I agree, but according to the user above (]) they are; everyone else I know does not use it (I actually didn't add that part of the ALT text). There's an apparent ] about this. I, for one, find it unnecessary. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:06, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
*<s>Page notation for single pages is "p.", not "pp."</s>
:*Done. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:06, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
I trust you can resolve these minor details, so I'm not watching. ] (]) 04:00, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
*'''Note:''' An archive has for ''USC dropout makes it big in animation'' has been located and implemented at (note the page takes a few minutes to load). ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:22, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

* '''Comment'''. ''Alt text done; thanks.'' Amandajm's remarks about alt text and proper names disagree with the Misplaced Pages guidelines. '']'' says that alt text typically should not name people or objects in an image. <s>Please reword the alt text to omit the phrases "Dan Provenmire", "City of Mobile", "Tommy Chong", and "Seth MacFarlane at Comic Con". Also, for '']'' please remove and/or reword the sentence "Square signs are posted on the wall behind him, bearing the name COMIC-CON in big bright yellow letters around a drawn eye and eyebrow." as these details cannot be verified from that image. Finally, please remove the phrases "Photo of" (3 instances) and "Snapshot of" as per '']''.</s> ] (]) 08:06, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
:*I figured that was the case. Fixed. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 03:11, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
:** Thanks, the alt text looks good now. ] (]) 07:11, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
*'''Info:''' New, non-IMDb source has been added for his EMA award; info about the episode's title has been removed as the source does not state it. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 22:57, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

*May I comment quickly that per ] articles can't have images (or quote boxes) left aligned directly under a sub-header, as it disconnects the text from the header.--]]] 19:27, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
:*Fixed. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 04:22, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
:* '''Incorrect''': that requirement has been removed both from MOS and from ]. ] (]) 17:32, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' - Are all the images in the article needed? It looks extremely cluttered. ''''']]''''' 17:35, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
:*Yes, I believe they do as they give context and visual understanding for the readers. What images look "extremely cluttered" to you? All align, except for the one of Seth MacFarlane, but not a big deal. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 18:35, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:52, 22 November 2009

Dan Povenmire

Nominator(s): The Flash 00:06, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Toolbox

After a copyedit and a GA review, I believe this article successfully complies with FAC criteria. It is well written, contains references to reliable sources, and follows all style/image guidelines. Now, something bound to come up is the sources. Here's what I've got to defend them:

Thanks in advance, The Flash 00:06, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Restart, previous nom. Citations are not consistent or correct (inconsistent date formats and incorrect use of italics), and it's not clear to me that sourcing concerns have been addressed. Images and alt text reviewed. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:52, 22 November 2009 (UTC)