Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Family Trade/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
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 promoted by Sarastro1 via FACBot (talk) 11:30, 20 January 2018 [1].

Family Trade

edit
Nominator(s): Bcschneider53 (talk) 20:32, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I present Family Trade, a short-lived American reality series that aired eight episodes on the Game Show Network in 2013, chronicling the daily activities of a GMC/Ford used car dealership in Middlebury, Vermont that employs the barter system in many sales of their vehicles. I have no idea why I'm so fascinated with this show; it's probably due to my affinity for a similar show, Pawn Stars (speaking of which, if the show had aired on the History Channel instead, I'm fairly confident it would have had a longer run). I've spent a long time extensively researching this show as best I can (even snapping a photo of the G. Stone Motors dealership while passing through Middlebury this summer), and I now believe it is the most extensive summary of the show one can find on the Internet. Considering this is what the article looked like when I began my work, to quote Gardner Stone himself, "I'm proud of what we have built." I think this final step will help polish the article even further and bring forward any final improvements. As always, all feedback is welcomed and greatly appreciated. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 20:32, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Aoba47
  • For this sentence (The dealership is operated by its founder, Gardner Stone, his son and daughter, Todd and Darcy, and General Manager Travis Romano.) in the lead, I would substitute “business” for “dealership” as the word “dealership” was used in the prior sentence.
  • I would include information on the show’s critical reception in the lead, and possibly a short part on its ratings.
  • In the “Format” section, please use Gardner’s full name on the first use and provide a short descriptive phrase to identify him to the reader as this is the first time you mention him in the body of the article.
  • I am not sure about the following phrasing (to be made that might otherwise end up in vain), particularly the “otherwise end up in vain” part.
  • For this sentence (The customers then negotiate the value of their items, usually with Gardner, but occasionally also with other members of the shop's staff.), I do not believe you need “then”.
  • Provide a descriptive phrase to introduce Darcy and Travis when you first introduce them. Also, I would use Travis’ full name when you first reference him.
  • I would identify that Eli Frankel is an executive from Lionsgate.
  • I would change (ordering a pilot show) to (ordering a pilot episode).
  • For this part (GSN then proceeded to order eight episodes of the series on August 9, 2012.), I do not think you need “then”.
  • I would link Middlebury on its first use in the body of the article.

Great work with this article. My review is focused on the prose. Once my comments are addressed, I will support this for promotion. Aoba47 (talk) 19:57, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Aoba47: Thank you for your review. I have addressed all your comments. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 20:38, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sources review

edit

Very little to raise here. Ref 5: I imagine that "Addison County Independent" is a printed source and should therefore be italicised. Otherwise.sources look in good order and of the requisite reliability. Brianboulton (talk) 13:10, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Brianboulton: I have amended this issue. Thank you for your review! --Bcschneider53 (talk) 16:34, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from MWright96
  • Wikilink upfronts to Upfront (advertising) the first time it is mentioned
  • "however, on February 1, GSN pushed the premiere date back a week to March 12." - I am assuming that no reasons were given for the change of debut, and if so, it should be clear
  • Consider archiving the remaining sources that have not already been archived.

Overall the majority of the prose is easy to read and engaging. Just the minor issues from me. MWright96 (talk) 09:01, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@MWright96: Archived the majority of the remaining links, fixed the two minor prose issues. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 16:28, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for addressing my queries Ben. Nothing else from me so I am more than happy to lend my support for this article to be promoted. Good work! MWright96 (talk) 18:56, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from AmericanAir88

edit

I will 100% support when these are fixed AmericanAir88 (talk) 02:47, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Could you elaborate more on the reselling part at the end of "Format"?
  • "His son Todd also claims" is a Weasel Word as it connects with "might". Rewording would be a good solution.
  • In format, you do not need to mention that Travis is the general manager as it is stated in the lead.
  • The cast section should go above the production
  • "Filming for the eight episodes began September 1, lasting around five or six weeks." Awkward Sentence
@Bcschneider53: Perfect

Support AmericanAir88 (talk) 16:18, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator comments: Unless I've missed it, I think we still need an image review. Also, I'm not sure we've had sufficient depth of review yet. Aoba47 has gone into some detail on prose, but I'm not sure we are covered on FA criteria 1b, 1c and 1d. Therefore, I'd like a few more eyes on this. Sarastro (talk) 21:57, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Sarastro1: Thank you for the update. I pinged Carbrera a couple days ago, so hopefully that review will come in soon. Perhaps Mike Christie and Jo-Jo Eumerus could provide another prose and image review respectively? (Please don't feel obligated, it's just, since you've reviewed my other GSN FAs, I think you'd be well-suited to look at this one too.) --Bcschneider53 (talk) 22:27, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Carbrera
  • The prose looks excellent; I can't find anything to improve on or suggest
  • Everything in the infobox seems to be supported by citations in the article, with the exception of the episode lengths; I think you should add this in the article's body somewhere – perhaps under 'Production'?
  • I believe a comma should be added after "network's upfronts on March 21, 2012" as you continue the sentence with additional text after stating a date
  • From my history with television series and episode guides, generally the line color matches the color used for the header above; could this be corrected?
Bcschneider53 – This looks very good. I'd be glad to take another look after you address my minor suggestions above. Thanks, Carbrera (talk) 00:25, 13 January 2018 (UTC).[reply]
@Carbrera: Thank you for your comments; I have amended the minor issues. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 01:50, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your swift changes. I can fully support this one. Carbrera (talk) 20:07, 13 January 2018 (UTC).[reply]
Image review
ALT text is there, although you may want to describe the image content a bit more than the image topic. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:32, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jo-Jo Eumerus: Many thanks. I have expanded the ALT text for both images. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 15:14, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment from Reywas92

Can you provide some more details in the episode summaries? For a show that probably isn't on streaming or DVD (or is it?), I'd really prefer more information than a TV guide listing. Reywas92Talk 06:58, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Reywas92: I have made a couple of minor additions, but only based on my memory from nearly five years ago. Unfortunately, the series is not available anywhere on DVD or otherwise as far as I know (though if it is and you find it, please let me know!), and I have researched this show extensively. Furthermore, I don't want to risk being overly-detalied either. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 21:40, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Mike Christie

edit
  • stating this on the dealership's website and on an episode of the show: why do we need to say this in the article?
  • Country music artist Jamie Lee Thurston writes a jingle for the dealership (which would later become the show's theme song) Since this is the last episode, "later" is confusing. I assume that the explanation is that the events in the last episode take place before the first episode is aired, but it would be nice to have this clearer.

That's all I can see for prose. I have not checked for other sources so I can't speak to comprehensiveness. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 17:35, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request for status update

edit

@Sarastro1 and Ian Rose: We have received five supporting reviews now complete with an image and source check. Would either of you mind giving this nomination a run-through to see if it's ready for promotion? Many thanks in advance for all you do here at FAC. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 03:00, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator notes: I don't think we are there yet. A few issues with the first part of the main body:

  • "The series features customers bringing in anything they believe is resalable[1] within reason to the dealership to help cover the cost of a new or used vehicle (including pigs, maple syrup, and collectable dolls)": Given that this is the first sentence of the main body, we need to explain what the series is and what the dealership is. "within reason" doesn't seem to be in the source given and is very vague. Also, should we not start with more context? Who commissioned the series? When? Why? And maybe start with a little on the dealership itself rather than just stating it was part of a series. So many issues in the first sentence worries me a little. Sarastro (talk) 22:49, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Possibly. I think the start of the main body needs to fully set the scene for what is going on. As it, we kind of jump in and assume the reader knows what is going on. It would seem to make more sense to give the background first. Sarastro (talk) 23:38, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Sarastro1: I just noticed Pawn Stars (currently a B-class article for a similar series) uses a section combining the two areas ("production history and format"). Should we do a similar thing here? --Bcschneider53 (talk) 23:44, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Looks better now, and just made a couple of minor alterations myself. I will promote shortly. Sarastro (talk) 11:29, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Family_Trade/archive1&oldid=821512809"