Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/SpongeBob SquarePants (character)/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 archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 14 June 2020 [1].

SpongeBob SquarePants (character)

Nominator(s): Jerry (talk) 03:05, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SpongeBob SquarePants is a well known animated character from the TV series of the same name, and I am hoping to promote this article so that there might be at least one SpongeBob-related FA, and so that I can bring an article of my own to TFA. This is my first time on this corner of the site, so if I've missed something, let me know. It's also the first time in a while that the article for a fictional character has come up on the queue, so there's not much precedent for me to look back on. Nonetheless, I await all your comments. Thank you.Jerry (talk) 03:05, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Aoba47

I always enjoy seeing a fictional character article brought to the FAC space. And I was a huge fan of the show when I was growing up. These are my comments for the lead and infobox. I will look through the rest of the article and add my comments by the end of the week if that is okay with you. I hope you are having a good week so far:

The naïve wikilink seems unnecessary to me.
I think that these two parts, (is portrayed as a naïve and goofy sponge) and (is characterized by his optimism and childlike attitude,), are somewhat repetitive as they conveying very similar information about his personality.
Is there any particular reason for using the chef wikilink for the phrase "fry cook" rather than the redirect fry cook. They both go to the same article, but the redirect goes to a specific subsection that may be more beneficial to readers unfamiliar with the concept.
For this part, the host of Hillenburg's book The Intertidal Zone, I would specify that it is a comic book.
I would rearrange this part: the cancellation in 1996 of Rocko's Modern Life, which he directed. I think something like the following would be better: the 1996 cancellation of Rocko's Modern Life, which he directed. I am suggesting this because this part, the cancellation in 1996, reads a little awkwardly to me, and I would put the show name right after the cancellation bit rather than the year.
- I think something like "... the cancellation of Rocko's Modern Life (which he directed) in 1996." would be much better. The original was unclear, but I don't think the new sentence is better. --Just gonna edit a bit (talk) 18:14, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - That seems fine to me. I do not think either version is that different. Aoba47 (talk) 04:03, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I would not put asexual in quote as it is not necessary. I also do not think the citation is necessary as this information should also be included and cited in the body of the article. It is generally discouraged to put citations in the lead.
Ethan Slater is named in the infobox, but he is not mentioned in the lead or the body of the article at all. I also think it is strange that the musical is not mentioned in this article at all as I would imagine there would be coverage on how this character is portrayed (either from the actor or critics).
In the lead, you describe Spongebob as just a sponge, but then call him a sea sponge in the infobox and a yellow tube sponge in the body of the article. I would pick one for consistency.
Please include alternative text for the infobox image. Aoba47 (talk) 04:36, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to note that the nominator (JerrySa1) has not been active on Wikipedia since May 18, 2020. I will not continue with my review since the nominator has not directly engaged with my comments above. Aoba47 (talk) 23:08, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Aoba47: Sorry, real life concerns are a bit in the way at the moment, which is why I've been inactive. Please continue your review though. Jerry (talk) 01:54, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the response. There are still unresolved issues that I have pointed out above, such as the use of a citation in the lead and how Ethan Slater (and the Broadway show in general) is only mentioned in the infobox and nowhere else. I would also add better ALT text than just the word "SpongeBob". Aoba47 (talk) 02:14, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just gonna edit a bit: copy-edit

I copy edited the lead. Please go over my edits, I'm very new to Wikipedia editing. Just one comment, you have a sentence in the lead saying, 'Hillenburg began developing a show based on the premise shortly after the 1996 cancellation of Rocko's Modern Life, which Hillenburg directed' You don't mention what premise Hilenburg based the show on. Just a question, has this article been copy-edited before? --Just gonna edit a bit (talk) 18:13, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you look on the article's talk page, there is a note that has receiced a copy-edit. Aoba47 (talk) 04:23, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article seems fine when it comes to grammar. Just gonna edit a bit (talk) 14:59, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Don't use fixed px size
Why center the captions in pieces?
File:Bob_the_Sponge_(The_Intertidal_Zone).jpg: FUR in this case is deficient - it's certainly not the primary means of identifying the character now. File:SpongeBoy_by_Stephen_Hillenburg.jpg has a longer FUR but still doesn't do a great job of explaining why the image is justified. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:31, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose article looks like it hasn't been updated since 2009, the "Criticism and controversy" as well as the "Critical reception" page don't reflect anything newer than 2009 despite the fact that the show has been on air for ten additional years. I'd be interested to hear how the character transitioned from the earlier episodes to the modern ones, if at all. Same with the "merchandising" section. The "Cultural impact and legacy" section hasn't been updated since 2011, which will of course require a re-balance of the sections once the article is updated. Not up to featured article status right now, so I'm opposing. Therapyisgood (talk) 00:10, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Coord note

Sorry but this review has stalled so I'm going to archive it. Per FAC instructions, there's a minimum wait of two weeks before nominating this again. As a newcomer to FAC, you might consider giving the FAC mentoring scheme a try beforehand. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:55, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 08:56, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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