Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Fritz the Cat/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 by Karanacs 17:32, 22 September 2009 [1].

---

Fritz the Cat

Nominator(s): Ibaranoff24 (talk) 18:11, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

• Featured article candidates/Fritz the Cat/archive1
• Featured article candidates/Fritz the Cat/archive2

I am nominating this for featured article because it was recently listed as a GA, and I believe it is ready to be promoted. This article was exhaustively researched, and is factually accurate, neutral, and very detailed in aspects discussing the comic strip, its publication history, the film adaptations and their legacy. Ibaranoff24 (talk) 18:11, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Comment. Images need alt text as per WP:ALT. Eubulides (talk) 20:11, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Ping. Still no alt text. It's just one image, so it shouldn't take long to add it. Eubulides (talk) 14:36, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

• Comments -
• What makes the following reliable sources?
  • http://www.toonopedia.com/fritz.htm
    • Donald D. Markstein is a well-known animation historian. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 14:57, 2 September 2009 (UTC))
      • Do we have an article on him? Or something to show this is the case? Ealdgyth - Talk 15:26, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
        • The site has previously been considered a reliable source and is often found in animation-related FAs. In this case, I can take the citation out, since it is redundant for the statement being cited. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 16:42, 2 September 2009 (UTC))
  • http://thedailycrosshatch.com/
    • This is an interview with Ralph Bakshi, the director of the film Fritz the Cat. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 14:57, 2 September 2009 (UTC))
      • I did notice that, but what makes the site itself reliable for reporting the interview? Ealdgyth - Talk 15:26, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
        • The site features a number of interviews and news stories relating to the animation industry. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 16:42, 2 September 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 Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-26/Dispatches for further detailed information. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:00, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

I decided to remove these sections, being that this information is covered in other articles, where it fits better. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 11:33, 3 September 2009 (UTC))

Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 00:28, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Prose looks reasonably good. Only a few hitches in my quick look-through.

• Lead: could remove "assorted"; "a worldwide hit" might be slightly exaggerated; "it was a directorial debut", better than "served as".

• Done. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 14:57, 2 September 2009 (UTC))

• "within" better as "in (early 1960s)".

• Done. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 14:57, 2 September 2009 (UTC))

• Fritz's personality is "glib, smooth and self-assured," —comma after the quotation unless it's really there in the original (even then, you don't need it within the quotation); please (see MoS).

• Done. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 14:57, 2 September 2009 (UTC))

• ""I just got into drawing him. [...] He was fun to"—ellipsis after a period is unspaced four dots: him... He was ... (And when not straddling a period, three dots spaced both sides—see "animals ... they're". Please audit throughout.

• Done. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 14:57, 2 September 2009 (UTC))

• "Anthropomorphic" linked twice; I think the first time is enough (?)

• Done. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 14:57, 2 September 2009 (UTC))

• The hated "in order to"—I've expunged it ("to").

• Done. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 14:57, 2 September 2009 (UTC))

• Major cities such as London, New York, LA—not usually linked (WP:LINK). Tony (talk) 02:25, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose I don't see how File:Fritz the Cat double feature.jpg is tied to the text. A poster is mentioned, but it doesn't appear to be this poster. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:32, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Expanded rationale. The text doesn't refer to the poster itself, but a presentation that Ralph Bakshi put together for Warner Bros. The image illustrates the animation style and the exploitive promotion techniques used by the films' distributors. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 17:07, 4 September 2009 (UTC))
    • The poster still isn't mentioned in the text, even in passing. I fail to see how a user's understanding is harmed by its removal. Nothing of the text cares one wit for the poster. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:10, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
      • Removed. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 12:35, 5 September 2009 (UTC))

• Image review There's only one image left, and it is valid fair use. Stifle (talk) 09:13, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

• Query - is the Maremaa article available for review? Could you maybe e-mail it to me? --Andy Walsh (talk) 22:02, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

• Here is the Google Books copy of R. Crumb: Conversations, where this cited interview appears. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 13:06, 22 September 2009 (UTC))

• The Google Books copy ends at p. 25 for that section; I cannot verify this sentence: "Following experiences with LSD in 1967, Crumb began to create other characters, and focused his attention on humans rather than anthropomorphic characters." Where in that chapter is that covered? --Andy Walsh (talk) 15:33, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

• That would be around here, on page 29. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 23:34, 22 September 2009 (UTC))

• Thanks. It looks like the nomination got archived this morning. I will leave further comments on the article talk page. --Andy Walsh (talk) 02:18, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

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