Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Gender Bender (The X-Files)

Gender Bender (The X-Files)

This nomination predates the introduction in April 2014 of article-specific subpages for nominations and has been created from the edit history of Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests.

This is the archived discussion of the TFAR nomination for the article below. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests). Please do not modify this page.

The result was: scheduled for Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 14, 2013 by Bencherlite ^Talk 13:16, 10 May 2013‎ (UTC)[reply]

"Gender Bender" is the fourteenth episode of the television series The X-Files. Premiering on the Fox network on January 21, 1994, it was written by Larry and Paul Barber, directed by Rob Bowman, and featured guest appearances by Brent Hinkley and Nicholas Lea. The show centers on FBI special agents Fox Mulder (David Duchovny) and Dana Scully (Gillian Anderson) who work on cases linked to the paranormal, called X-Files. In this episode, Mulder and Scully begin investigating a series of murders following sexual encounters. The two soon discover that a member of a religious sect living in Massachusetts may be responsible—and may not be human. The episode was inspired by producer Glen Morgan's desire for "an episode with more of a sexy edge"; however, the writers found it difficult to write a story that showed sex as scary. This difficulty led to the introduction of an Amish-like community as well. "Gender Bender" has subsequently been met with mixed critical responses, facing criticism for its abrupt deus ex machina ending. Academic analysis of the episode has placed it within a science-fiction tradition that attributes a powerful, supernatural element to physical contact with aliens. It has also been seen as reflecting anxieties about emerging gender roles in the 1990s. (Full article...)

Last television article was Russell T Davies on April 27, last episode of television was several weeks before that on April 9; so this is either at -2 or 0 points depending on how you look at that (by the time this could be slotted in, the two weeks/one month limits will pass on those). Alternatively, you could say that we've never featured an article on shapeshifting space Amish sex addicts... GRAPPLE X 16:51, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Even assuming that the image adds something to the article, does it add anything useful to the blurb? Bencherlite ^Talk 19:17, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Probably not, but I shoved it in just to avoid an image being forced in that's not even used in the article (happened to my last TFA so I figured I'd be pre-emptive). Could be removed without consequence but I'd rather not see something shoehorned in as a replacement if it's not in the article. GRAPPLE X 19:23, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I do try and revert inappropriate images that are added into TFA blurbs after an image-free nomination at TFAR but I don't always have the energy to do so. Some editors seem to think that any image is better than none, but as the discussion below about FF shows, there are different views about whether to use images and if so what sorts.... Joy. Bencherlite ^Talk 20:46, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I know there's different ideas going round, just it does seem that the process of adding images seems to come from wholly outside the TFA process quite a bit, which can be annoying (and I didn't mean to come across like I was directing anything at you, which I now think I might have done, so apologies if it sounded that way). If you think it's better without an image I'm happy to omit it (though maybe a hidden note to say "use from the article if you absolutely must but don't fetch something from elsewhere" might not be the worst idea for noms in the future without a good blurb image). GRAPPLE X 20:57, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]