Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Harry Potter fandom/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 02:08, 1 June 2007.

Harry Potter fandom

Taken this through two peer reviews, and is currently a GA. I feel this is an excellent, comprehensive, and well-referenced representation of the fandom, with all free use images. If this article is passed, it would be great to see it on the Main Page in time for the 21 July release of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. --Fbv65e del / ☑t / ☛c || 01:34, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion: I shall review the article and provide comments in a short while, but getting JK Rowling to FA would be the best thing for July 21. I just checked the article is already at GA level. If you are interested, i think you should look to take that article to FA. Kalyan 05:20, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: Only had chance to read lead and pottermania section but have the following concerns:
- "official release date at midnight that morning" - not very clear
  - Cleared this up.
- The paragraph on summer camps seems out of place to me.
  - It's meant to demonstrate what kids who are clearly fans of the book have to do when they are at camp.
- The Pottermania section is mainly about the book releases. Consider retitling the section, or include more generalised 'mania'!
- 'Influences on Culture' again seems to be random (the headache doctor sounds a bit odd). I'm not sure how you split Harry Potter Fandom influence on culture to the influence of Harry Potter itself.
- The article concentrates mostly on the books. How has the fandom community reacted to the films for example?
  - The hard part about this is that there's very little material with which something like this could be cited. There are plenty of newspaper articles about online fandom and book releases, but movie articles and scholarly works are hard to come by. --Fbv65e del / ☑t / ☛c || 04:49, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry - forgot to sign above comments Quantpole 22:26, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, doesn't fully describe the extent to which the series has affected the world, as per Quantpole's comments. Having said that, the lead does not sufficiently sumamrize the article and needs to be improved. Since that little quote under 'Fan sites' needs a spoiler warning, it's probably not necessary; I would think a link to the text is fine. -- Phoenix2 ^{(talk, review)} 00:27, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I've removed the spoiler warning and can accept that concern that it is not broad enough, however, I would appreciate more comments on the lead -- what more should be said in order to encompass the whole scope of the article? --Fbv65e del / ☑t / ☛c || 04:49, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for different reasons. The article seems to be confusing Harry Potter fandom with "popularity of Harry Potter". The two are not the same. For example, a Harry Potter theme park has everything to do with the popularity of the Harry Potter franchise, but it has nothing to do with the fans of Harry Potter (except that some of them will probably visit the park). The "Pottermania" section is particularly bad about this. — Brian (talk) 04:15, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Perhaps the two subsections of the "Pottermania" section should be moved to the general Harry Potter article. How would it look then? --Fbv65e del / ☑t / ☛c || 04:49, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - I don't think the problem is the existence of the section, though. I just think someone needs to comb through the article and separate out all the bits that are about the general popularity of the Harry Potter franchise and leave the bits that are about the fans of Harry Potter. — Brian (talk) 10:00, 31 May 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.