Talk:Marita Covarrubias

Marita Covarrubias has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 11, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on March 19, 2012.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that in portraying Marita Covarrubias in The X-Files, actress Laurie Holden spent hours learning fifteen seconds of Russian dialogue?

Television: The X-Files Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the X-Files task force (assessed as High-importance).

Fictional characters

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

A summary of this article appears in List of The X-Files characters.

Help

This article needs to be expanded by an expert.

I changed it a bit and stuff - just llike some headings and stuff, bye x —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.129.65 (talk) 23:57, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Uniblonder?

Firstly, a statement that fans call her this needs a citation; it seems far too cumbersome to have been created by a professional writer, so I do not question the fact it is a fan invention (if it is just an internet thing, the reference should probably be lower in the article). I know nothing about this nickname, or indeed the character, but shouldn't it be "Unablonder" anyway? It would appear to be a reference to Theodore Kaczynski, so I would assume the spelling of the nickname would be the same. Rje 02:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You would expect so, but no. It was just a fan nickname, used on the alt.tv.x-files Usenet group, and probably in other fan discussion ...uh... venues. "Un-" of course in part because she worked for a department in the UN, and yes, in part from "unabomber" which also provided the "-er" suffix. Even so, it was usually written as "The Uniblonder", with an "i", about 90% of the time. Sometimes just "Uniblonder". Search Google Groups for both "Uniblonder" and "Unablonder". There are also hits for "Uniblonde" and "Unablonde". Planish 02:43, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A Cinefantastique interview with Holden made mention of "UNblonde" (with that capitalisation) as an online nickname, so it's been included and sourced to that journal. GRAPPLE X 12:37, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Murder of CSM

CSM comes back in the ninth season and is murdered by a missile attack, no? So, she did not murder him by throwing him down a flight of stairs, she only attempted it.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Marita Covarrubias/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Crisco 1492 (talk · contribs) 01:55, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Checklist

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
	1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Fine
	2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	See below
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Fine
	2c. it contains no original research.	Fine
	3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	See below
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Fine
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Fine
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Per definition. Only constructive edits
	6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Pending

Comments

1

1a

"She was initially introduced as an informant of sorts, leaking diplomatic information to FBI Special Agent Fox Mulder to aid his investigation of paranormal cases, dubbed X-Files." - What exactly is an "informant of sorts?"
- I've ditched "of sorts", had sorta intended to imply she never really had anything tremendously useful to offer but I guess it's too vague a way to get that across. GRAPPLE X 02:13, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"... commented that roughly fifteen seconds of screen-time took painstaking hours to rehearse." - Is "painstaking" really necessary?
- Nah, it's not. Gone. GRAPPLE X 02:13, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Jeffrey Spender, Alex Krycek, Walter Skinner... who are these people?
- Clarified. GRAPPLE X 02:13, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Debra Warlick, writing for Cinefantastique, felt that Holden's acting in "One Son" was "heart breaking", but found that she had "unfortunately" been used simply to convey a plot point to other characters." - Misspelling (heart breaking instead of heartbreaking) in the original? If so, {{sic}} should be used.
- Ah, hadn't realised that would normally be one word. Sic template added. GRAPPLE X 02:13, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2

2a

Why do you include the time for some references and not others? Compare FN 2 and 4.
Added the time to ref 4. GRAPPLE X 02:20, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

3

3a

Was she only in those four episodes?
There's six episodes used in the plot (some were two-parters though so their story summaries run together, it is four "chapters" I suppose). She appeared in a few other episodes (ten in total) in a more stand-alone role, just generally helping the plot of a particular episode advance without doing anything that affected a wider plot (for example, she simply gives some basic immigration and passport information on murder victims in the episode "Teliko"). I could fluff that out a little more with incidental details if you think it's too short. GRAPPLE X 02:25, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nah, but perhaps a note on how many episodes she was in (if you have a source for it). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:26, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Added another sentence just to help things. I don't have a source that singularly cites all her appearances but I could probably bundle together page refs for a few books crediting her appearances season to season. Would you want that in the infobox or elsewhere? GRAPPLE X 02:37, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds like a good idea, assuming the infobox can support it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:43, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Added. If you think it needs tweaking, let me know. I could probably add a list of a episodes instead of just a number; though I'd be tempted to use a small text size for it (just this size though). GRAPPLE X 03:16, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think, if we're going to just have a number, we should bundle FNs 1-3. An episode list would be fine though. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:23, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How does the list look? I could probably bundle those refs and hand the inline cite on the "appearances" bit instead of any particular episode title. GRAPPLE X 03:34, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

6

6a

Why no image of the character herself? Isn't she somewhat or significantly different than the actress?
I felt a non-free file of the character might not seem important or "irreplaceable" if there was a free image of the actress (similar articles like X (The X-Files) or Deep Throat (The X-Files) use a non-free image since there's no free image of their actors, so a non-free image of character fits NFCC better than one of a living actor). If you feel a screenshot would be a better image to include then I'm happy to upload one and switch it in instead of the one of Holden, wouldn't take me more than a minute or two. GRAPPLE X 02:29, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Thirteen (House) for an example of an article with a non-free image. I'd support keeping a non-free image in X (The X-Files) as well as the character and actor are quite different. I think it passes FUC1 as there is no way to get a free image of the character herself, and FUC8 as the article is about the character/role and not the actress. Of course, I'd defer to you on this one. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:37, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I brought up X as there's no free image of Steven Williams, you see; so either way an image would be non-free. I'll go find a good image of the character now and add it; I'll leave it to you to decide whether to go solely with that or keep the Holden image in there too. GRAPPLE X 02:40, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I meant that, for X, even with a free image I'd keep it as Steven Williams the person and X the character have different appearances... although it would be interesting if he did wear that outfit everywhere. I'd say keep both. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:43, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Steven Williams is fabulous. Feather earrings and the lot. Would have made X a whole different ballgame if he'd been in charge of wardrobe, I'm guessing. GRAPPLE X 02:49, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hehehe... Can't stay low key feather earrings. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:53, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Stuck a picture in there, let me know what you think. GRAPPLE X 03:16, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good, quite different than her actress methinks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:23, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Spotchecks (based on this revision)

FN3:

FN3a: Checks out, no close paraphrasing
FN3b: Checks out, no close paraphrasing

FN20: Checks out, no close paraphrasing

FN21: Hmm... He notes that Krycek is also like that, so perhaps a qualifier?

Done. GRAPPLE X 02:29, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:23, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Further discussion

On hold for seven days to deal with above issues. Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:55, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, looks good. Passing — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:00, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]